AN INTRODTJCTTON TO,TI'IE YoG hs U:TR A,

. , \

273:, j , . r

B1

RAM SHAI{KAR BHATTACHf i lTAM.4., ph.D., VyaUrtn*raiya

:BHARATIYA VIDYA PRAKASANADEI,HI VARANASI

( rNDrA )

273r2:qrejro.ErR |*tqi

rTrFT qFqltq tgtt rret ts5t (aqffiut

c,frftf"t sqrq* frqt rt

1. dq qnqt( ii. sq" rtv )

R. 63qtwi uieaa\nfawaq( r?errem er. lttl )

i. qiqi q'td ue+adq goi n luf,eroq( nm tvtl )

rr a'lrnq dxrcqi arct(aksmr'Er l{le )

t. faqive] fagersfuiis{ qas}t{trttl*qlq:

( taoaaaq qJqnrB sEe.ffi., 5. tqt )

q. qd { qrq} sdt aE d*arit<dae( qmo egfle tta )

s. arfta sieqq{ ilt arfta q}qq{ citq( lrrFac'i ltQrl )

c. qrrwtrdnrirtq *,nerffefn<r{4q RrRc Faqafrfir{rgEEq }

1273r2-'

FOREWORD

I am very happy to say a few words regarding tlris rvork

viz. An Introduction to the Yogasiltra by Dr. Ram Shankar

Bhattacharya. I am happy because he not only tells us somethingnew but also initiates a new method of research intended to

awaken the scholars of Indian philosophy from their dogmatic

slumber. Dr. Bhattacharya is a devoted and competent scholar of

Indian philosophy in geoeral and of Sdirkhya agd Yoga in

particular. But his devotion does not stand in the rvay of his,

raising unorthodox questions and from questioning w-hat is

traditionally accepted without question. While questioning age-

old viervs he is not disrespectful; he has humility and true jijfiasa

but with a complaint that interpreters and commentators do not

even see problems, much less solve them. Mostly they areconcerned with the explanation of language but eveo there theydo not see problems arising from the use of certain words. So thervork of Dr. Bhattacharya presents not only some fresh points for.

our consideration but also suggests a new method of research

which may yield fruitful results if followed in other areas. lVhileit is not possible to summarise his arguments or even to go intothe details of some of them here, I may draiv attention to a pointby way of illustration.

At the very outset the autbor points out that ygantiasonlmmeans JlgAnAm anulAsanam. He suggests that Patafrjali's sdtrasare concemed not witb ooe yoga but with all yogas. As such

.yogaicittoraytti-nirodhaft is not a definition of a particular I'ogabut a sfitra giving the essential characteristic of all yogas.

Considering the composition of the Yogasfrtras, Dr.

Bhattacharya concedes tbat tlere may have been interpolations

at plaees and also that the order of the siltras is not alwayscoherent. But he forcefully contests the view that the YogasEtra

is by more than one author or that the 4th Chapter was added

[ 6 ]

later. His arguments deserve serious attention' He has sometbing

valuable to say also reg-arding the various readings of the Yoga-

sfitra. The author'" -otru*-ution

regarding the use :f-::"ii

terms (sarvaratna in II' 37, punah in III' 12' vtut-a in lll' Jo

and ali*sida in IV. 29) should i"t"'"tt scholars of the Yoga Sfrtra'

Dr. Bbattacbarya does not regard the author of Yogasuka

as identical with the autbor ol Mah6bh6'lya' much less with that

of ParamS.rthas-ara The argument is novel' How could one and

the same rnan use the term aneka in singular and plural both ? To

Dr. Bhattacharya Patafljali seems to be the name of a gotra and

not of an iridividual. Any way, he thinks that tle composition

of Yogas-utra belonp to a period after the Mah-abh6rata but

before Bqddha. He refutes the view that it was composed after

Buddba.

The views of Dr. Bhattacharya are very refreshing and

stimulating. Everyone who cares to go through the book is bound

to feel rewarded. One may or may not accept his views but it

is certain that one cannot ignore sofne of his arguments' I do

hope that the book will provoke the scholars to make further

research and also to employ some new methods used in this

book. Indeed I wish the same method were employed to discuss

someother old texts of Indian philosophy' The book is valuable

not only for its conclqsions but also for its new method of

investigation. I am sure it will win the appreciation that it

eminentlY deserves'

28.9. l9B5

Ra1 Karan SharnaVice-Chancellor,

Sampumanand Sanskrit University, Varanasi

PRBFACE

My main object of writing the present work is two-fold :

'firstly to draw the attention oimodem scholars to some such

important points of the Yoga-sEtra as will enable them to

comprehend the peculiar character. of the work and secondly to

show the proper traditional way ofstudying the sltras'

I have painfully obsetved that absence of adequate Sastric

toowledge as found in most of the modem scholars is the main

cause for conceiving rnany wrong ideas about the Yog:as-utrat

examples of which will be found in many places of this book'

It is needless to say that I have adopted the useful aspect

of the process of critical research' I may further add that I

-have not followed the commentators blindlli nay, some of the

views of the commentators have been criticized and in a few

places the faulty character of their views has been shown in

clearest terms.The present work deals with the external ( bahirahga I

aspect of the Yog-a philosophy. Since it is an "Introduction'

the

treatment of some points is not exhaustive. But what has been

stated that'is sufficient to prove the assertions of the author' The

author believes that the arguments and illustrations given here nrill

enable the readers to study the Yogasfitrain a much deeper way'

The intemal aspect of tbe Yoga philosophy will be dealt

with in my fortbconing work. It will contain essays ontbe view-

point of the Yoga philosophy as well as on the entities that have

been chieflY discussed in it.

In conclusion I express deep reverence and profound

gratefulness to the late Svdmin Harihar6nanda Arapya, a great

-yogin of modem tigl€sr whose expositions of th€ YoSu

philosopby ( ilfionr*q qKTo ftIEdq ) has been a perpotual

'rourcc of light to m€,

Vijaya-da3amt'October 23, l9B5

D. 38/8, Houz Katora

VARANASI

Ram Shankar'BhattachlrYa

CONTENTS

ChaPter I

YOGA AND YOGIC TRADITI,ON

l. Yoga and yog6nuS-asana ..' I

2. The existence of Pre-Pataijalian yogic

tradition and'Yoga'fieatises .. 7

3, The Hiranyagarbha Sastra-A pre-Patafljalian

treatise 16

4, Contents of the Hirar.ryagarbha-$astra as

stated in the Ahirbudhnya-sarhhitd 19

5. A rvrongly conceived pre-Pataffjalian treatiss

( in s[tra ) on yoga 25'

ChaPter II

THE COMPOSITION OF THE YOGASUTRA'

l. Coherence in the four-fold division of the

Yogasltra .. 3l

2. Is the fourth pada a subsequent addition ? . . 36'

3. Some sitras of doubtful authorship ... 43

4. Anomalous placing of some s[tra's 48:,

5. Is it justified to hold that the Yogasfitra

is a work of multiple authorship ? ' 32

6. A note on the siltras in the Yogasiltra . 5&

7: A note on the variant readings in the

.YogasEtra 6B''

8. Wrong readings of a few sfrtras - ,;. '

7r"

9. A verse of tbe Klqnacarita on the Yogasitra

Ie]ChaPter III

Pago"'

THE AUTHOR OF THE YOGASUTRA

l. The name Pataiijali 85

2. The mythical life of Patafrjali 90'

3. Identity of the yogin Patafrjali rvith the

author of the Mahabh6gya-an unfotrnded

vierv 94-

4. Imaginary identity of the author of the

YogasGtra with the author of certain medical

treatises, of the Param-arthas6ra and of some

other works 98'

5. A verse of the V-akyapadiya on the identity

of three Patafljalis '. lOt

6. Identity of Patafrjali whose statement

on drau)a has been quoted in the VySsabhf,lya ... 103'

ChaPter IV

DATE OF THE YOGASUTRA

l. Factors that determine the date of the

Yogas-utra 109'

2. Futility, of arguments advanced to prove

alater date of the Yogasitra '.. llSi

3. Does Burldha's silence about the Yogasiltra

mean its non-existence at his time ? 126'

Chafter V

IMPORTS OF A FE\M WORDS IN THE YOGASUTRA"

l. Wrong explanations and renderings of some

words in the Yoga'sfitra 133

2. VAr& : a wrongly conceived word in the

Yogasfrtra l4t!

t : t lo ]pagc

3. Notes on a few wsrds ( kuslda, janmakatluntd, )

j y otigtmfi , s ar e u atn o, funa h, d I a s I a, a ik g e pa-sahablfi, dlrgha-sttkgna, od. ) 146

APPENDICES

l. Views and passages of the Hiranyagarbha-yoea3dstra as recorded in authoritative works .., l7l

SI. Compilation of Purdnic passages similar tothe silkas in the Yogasltra .., I7+

INDEX 18I

A . I . ; H . T .

Ap. Dh. SfitraBal.Bh.BhikquBr.-Upc. H. I .Comm.c. Dh. siH . I . P .

H. Y. P.I . P .

MB.Mbh.MS.

o. D.s.s.T.

ABBRIVIATTONS

-Ancfunt Indian Historical Tradition( by'Fargitet )

-B6lamanorama commentarv-Bhdpya

-Vijfianabhiksu

-Bihadlranyaka Upanigad:Culhrral Heritage of India-commentary; commentato r-GautamadharmdsEtra-A Hisory of Indian philosophy

(by Or. S. N. Dasgupta)"

-Ha[hayogaprad ipik-a by SvStm6r6ma-Indian philosophy ( by S. Radha_

krishnan )-MahZ.bhfuya-Mahabhdrata

-manuscript.

-Origin and Devolopment of SamkhyaSystem of Thought (by p,rlin BehariChakravarti)

-Purd,lra

-plural (number)-Sdrhkhyakarikd (by irivaralgtna)-Saraswati Bhavarra Saudies-singular (number)-Siddhdnta-kaumudi ( by 'Bholfoji

Dikfir.r )-Six Systems of Indian philosophy

(by F. Max Mtiller)-siltra

P. ; p .pl .SAril.kaS. B. Studiessing.

S. Kau.

s. s. r . P.

sil.

-Tai. Br.Tat. Sam.'T.

Bod

I 12 ]

-Taittiriya Br-ahmana-'faittitrlya SathhitS-Tattvabodhint commentary ( bY

Vdzudevadik$ita ) on the Sidhtuita

Kaumudi-translation, translator

-Tattvavai66radi commentary ( bY

V6caspati ) on the VYasabhS'qYa

-Upaniqad

-V-akvapadiYa ( bY Bbartrhari )-Vivarana comm. ( bY Satikara ) on

Vy-asabh6-sYa-Yoga PhilosoPhY-Yogasltra-Yogavartika

--siqeEqic {r qff,€Ts ( vcazitr {rI* )-steqEric dt Eftt€rfst q{cq<t ( qrqr

ssIE Fqq )

tr.T. Vai.

U p .V6k-P.Viv.

YP.YS.Y. v-ar.qT. S. q.

'ff. c. q. q.

CHAPTER

1

YOGA AND YOGIC TRADITION

IYOGA AND YOGANUSASAI\*A

It is highly necessary to know the significance ofthe first'two sitras, namely Atha .yogdnulAsanam andTogai ci,ttaaytt niro-dhal.t io order to comprehend the nature and scope of theYogasiltra. There arise a few problems concerning these twosfitras. As in the brief compass of this work it is not possibleto deal with these problems I we are giving here our conclusior-swith necessary details.

The wordyo gdnulasana is to be dissolved as )ogilnam anu.(A.sanam, i, e., anularczo concerning )ogas. The word yoga means'particular states and modes of the citta' ( ci,tta is to be taken inthe Yogic sense ), These states and modes have been classifiecin different ways by ancient teachers. A difference in classifica-tion does not necessarily mean contradiction.

l. Some of the points on which problems arise are: ( I ) Thenecessity for using the word atha, for there are a considerablenumber of most ancient works that do not use the word atthe beginning, namely the Chandas-sitra of pirigala ancithe DharmasEtra of Gotama; ( ii ) appropriateness of usingthe word anuiasana with yoga, for ancient works are oftenfound not to use any rvord with the names o[ topl.cs; aide\p.Dl-,.Sfitra t .7 .2t.7 (sTq qailqrfi l), or G.Dh. Siltra 6. f (av araq):( iii ) relevance of using the rvord ;,oga in the secorrd, sfrtra,lor it can be replaced by the masculine word saft, which car.rightly refer to the word yogah in the preceding sfrtra (tliougl:it is a member of a compound word yog-anuSasanam);tiv) reie-.rance of forming the second sfitra as a sepr_rate proposition"for the first 5[11a, if composrd as arq fqg7fuA*furgrfrWq,may well serve the p!.rrpose of the second sitra,

4 An Introduction to the Yogastrtra

It is usually considered that the purpose of the second sfirta'

is to show the relation of satkjfra and sathjfr,in between yoga

and aytti'-nirod'ha. It is wrong. Had yoga been coined as a

sarlyfra by Patafrjali, the word would have been used in the rest

of the YS. as we find in the works l ike the As[adhySyi of

Pa4ini.a ( Here the safiifras like af ddhi', gutla' etc' are used in

a considerable number of siltras. ) This sItra, according to us,

simply says that each state or mode of the citta' which is called

yoga in the tradition of adlry-atmauid;:a ot moksnlastra' invariably

possesses the characteristic of ayttinirod'ha, effected by Yogic

means.'-'--- it may be objected that the wording of the sfitra is not in

accordance with our view tbat ci'ttauyttini'rodftc is the common

characteristic of all mental states and modes known as yoga

(i.e., ayttinirod'ha ditrerentiates the yogas from all non'yogic

states and modeslike sleep etc' )' Our reply is that examples'

of such loose construction is often met with in ancient works

composed in s[tra. One example wouid suffice' V-atsydi'ana

says 'Aqama$ prati ' i f ia' ( Bh on NS' I ' l ' 1 ) ' which' so fa'r as

the forms of the words are concerned, means '-agama is the same

asprati j i ia'. In fact the sentelce is to be taken inthe sense

'ngatns is to be understood as lying atthe mula ol prati jVa'"

A grave study of Sanskrit l i terature rvould shorv that the princi-

ple of precision and accuracy in usiog words we"s not adequately

observed. by our ancient teachers, Teachers of comparatively

l- 'rter ages seem to be more and more careful in using words'

It is needless to say that the states and modes called yoga

have also other attributes of their own. These states and modes

2. Though the YS, contains the word yoga in 22.8 qlqlqqt-

EESTai{)and in a.7(U}ftrr:), Yet this does not invalidate our

irgu*"ot. Patanjali does not seem to lay stress on tiiis word

in slr. 2.2B. for he uses the word ai)go instead of ygahgain

2,29. In 4.7 the wotd 2o gi,n is used in the sense of a j iuanmukta

( see the wotd coranadeha in the Bh-a ya )' All yogins are not

jraantntiktas. Tlte wold logi'n may be replaced by any other

suitable word.

Yoga and Yogdnudasana 5

'zre serylslirnes called by names other than yoga. It is to be'noted that the word yoga is used in secondary senses also.This is why we find the use of the rvord yoga in various senges inancient works. which, in fact, does not ,ho* nny contradiction,for all entit ies called yoga do contain the characteristic ofoytti,nirodha, Thus it is clear that the rvord yoga does not meanoytti,ni,rodha.

The reason for calling these states and modes ryoga, is notfar to seek' since armost alr of these states are associated withcertain Alambanas they are called yoga ( from the rootyi?7, toconnect or attach),; it rnay also be considered that since all thesestates are characterised by a. great amount of colrectednessthey are called yoga (from the root yuj in the sense of samadh\.aSome are of opinion that these states and modes are called yogasimply because they are the means {updya ) to emancipation,i. e., without acquiring the states called yoga none can attainisolation ( haiual2a). There rnav be other reasons too.

The word anuiAsana shows that patafjali did nothing but're'stated the doctrines fully known to his predecessors. TheYS. does not shorv any ,originality'of its a_uthor, so far as thedoctrines are concerned. The originarity I ies in the art ofpresentation. ft ma..v be rightly heid that patafljali,s presenta-'t ion was highly helpiui to his disciples or to the aspirants of yofain his time.

Since the YS. was chiefl;r composed by patafrjali for hisdisciples and for those who were closely connected with thetradition of adh),amaaidla ( and not for those who wanted toacquaint themselves urith the doctrines of 2ogaoidryA throughthis text ) it was not necessary for pataffjali to propound altthe views with details, whatever importance is given to thesedetails by the critics of rater times. This is why most of thesiltras ds nor seem to be fully intell igible. The study of the

s. gQr t}t ( rurfaaur ); gs qqTsl ( fesrlerrq qu ).

6 An Introduction to the Yogasiltra

YS. becomes more or less useless if it is not learnt from aperson of yogic traditiona.

N'irodha ( YS. 1. 2 ) rneans a particular kind of inhibit ion( mark the use of the prefix ni ), Vrtti,nirodha, means both ( I )the non-rise of all kinds of afttis and ( 2 ) the non-rise ofundes-ired urtti,s. Non-rise may be for a considerable length of timeor for ever. The non-rise of oytli,s implies the cessation ofsathskAras ( latent impressions ) also, lbr these impressions arenothing but the subtle forms ol a{ltis, It should be also borne

in mind that any state that is favourable to this non-rise

also falls under the denomination af nirodha. This is rvhyekagratd ( one-pointedness ) and the like are regarded as theinit ial stages of yoga.

The YS. deals with supernormal powers, the tattaas^ lhekleias etc. as they are intimately connected with urttonilod.ha.The rise of supernormal powers is natural and as such no treatiseon yoga can dispense with them. The tattuas ( principles ) areconsidered in the YS. not independently but in connectionwith miseries or sufferings and the means for their iradication.fn the YS. the tt,ttaas are not considered with necessary details.

They form the chief subject of Sarirkhya. The discussion onkleia, karman etc. has been taken up since the rise ol' aTtti,s is

largely dependent upon them.

4. "Thisphilosophy..... was naturally very concise and depen-

ded for its clear exposition on the mental conception of those

to whom it was communicatedrt ( Yoga Philosophy of Patafr-jali; Foreword by Swami Dharmamegha Aranya, p. i).

2,THE Exr$TENcE oF pRE-pAraffieneN yoGrc

TRADITION AND YOGA TREATISES

We have already said that the use oflthe word anulasana(in 1. l) indicates that the YS. is fully based on the teachings ofancient teachers i. e., none of its doctrines was unknown to thepredecessors of its author. A careful reading of the yS.also revealsthat it contains such expressions as prove that it is bared onactual treatises ( i. e. orderly collections of definite sentences )of ancient teachers. Following examples may be consideredin this connection :

( A ) The Yogasilrra speaks of the group aqimadi in 3.45,which consists of eight si,ddhi,s beginning with atyi,man It maybe easily understood that the making of a group by using theword Adi,, prabhrti, etc. clearly shows that all the members ofthe group were known to the predeccssors of the author. Hadthis group not been well known, Patafljali would have mentioned,the names of all the members ( i.

". the names of the super-

normal powers ) of this group. That the aryi,madi, group is anestablished one may be proved frorn its mention in the works ofthe differernt schools of philosophy; aide Nletratantra 1.291Binduyoga, p. 95; Vatsy6yana's bhaqya on Nyd,yasEtra 4,1.21.r

Sometimes there arises difficulty in determining the inten.ded number of members enumerated in a group. We find themention of apim-adi group again in the Bh-agya passage kayasid-dhirapimadya (on YS.2.43). Though the group containseightmembers as shown above, yet according to the tradition the

l. It is interesting to note that the name of this group hasnot been coined by any teacher ofany school by using thename of any other siddhi of this group. For the intendedmeaning of aryi.man, laghi,man and mahimaz, see my paper: .fs

it jus ified to read gariman in the list of the eisht siddhis'( BrahmavidyE, Vol. 42 of 1978 ).

'I An Introduction to the Yogas[tra

expression apimady6 stands here for the first three siddhis,

namely agi,man, laghiman and mahi'man for tbese thtee si,d'dhi's are

regarded as iarha ( belonging to the body ),' aide the statement

of the ancient sage Devala on the si'ddhis ( quoted in Mokqaka-

rlda, p. 216; the readings as printed are in some places

corrupt ). z A similar instance is to be found in s-u. 3.23 also'

Here the maitrladi group includ es maitri, karupd' and rutd'ita ( and

notupek6L,. aide the Bhagya ) though these four sentiments are

said to form a parikarman in YS 1.33. The maitry-adi group

consisting of these three members must hal'e been traditionally

known, otherwise it would have been taken as consiting of all

those four sentiments that have been mentioned in YS. 1.33.3

2. Vdcaspati however enumerates prdpli along with agiman,

Iaghiman and mahimar evidently by taking help from the

Bhagya passage stFE: 3lgilF4isl tgslft q;Ecqq. As lhe finger

is a bodily part, the power pr-apti seems to have been conside-

rcd, iarira ( belonging to the body ). In fact the Bh-asya

passage does not define prd,pti but shows an illustration only.

Prdpti has been correctly defined by Devala as fqsaiqqqt-

sTf{t I ctci4T s?ictqetsff ttqfe ( quoted in Mok;akdnda,

p.216), whlchclearly showsthat itdoes not belong tothe

body.

3, Itcannot be urged that the sEtra 1.33 could have been

formed more briefly as feqrE'lct gqlf<fasqtoti qretteflsga-

sVIEiIq, for it is a sltra showing a particular way of

yoga practice ( the YS' being a work dealing chiefly with the

ways and means ). The principle of brevity is applied by

ancient teachers not blindly but in such a way as not to

impede the purpose and nature of the Sestra concerned; cp'

the sratement of Ny6yabhagya 1. l. 5 ( farnnaa{r?e

fafeqlqfd Fqd faieqevd nqa) q€Tisqq*q ?4IxT(4 o{tqst

qiur'friurq vt sIEqaIEI?i q;qqt?T{q srqRqE sl;IgoTqas'qrsr: ) r

The existence of pre-Pataffjalian yogic tradition 9

( B ) The YogasEffa asserts that the Pantabhilmi frajftaissevenfold (2.27) and does not say anything on those seven forms.

This non-mention undoubtedly shows that these seven forms

were fully known to the predecessors of Pataffjali. Had this

division been conceived by Pata;jali for the first time, he would

have given descriptive remarks about these seven forms in the

body ofthe siltra.

It should be noted in this connection that an author may

state both the number and the names of the entities in a sEtra

in order to serve some purpose4; ui'de Y5.2,29 which mentions

the name of the eight accessories of yoga and uses the word'e ight 'a lso.

( C ) Patafrjati has used the word dhararya in plural number

in sii. 2.53, though the word does not belong to the group of

those uords (l ike ap, suma,nas, etc. ) that are to beused in plural

number. It is quite justifiable to think that the plural number

indicates the pluraliry of dharayas, lVhen the aspects or forms

of an entity is indicated in this way it may reasonably be

concluded that these forms or aspects were well known in the

tradition.

That ancient teachers were aware of a large number of

dhara4a may be known from the description of various kinds

of dharaga in the works of later period, which describe themoften in similar expressionss . Ihe similarity in expressionsshows that these descriptions are based on ancient texts dealingwith these forms of dharaga. Similarly the plural number inthe word bhiuri in sil. 3.6 indicates that these bhruris rvere wellknorvn in the yoga tradition to which Patafljali belonged.

The commentators are often found to show the purpose forusing the number along with the names of the entitiesenumerated, uid,eHamdatta's cornment on G. Dh. S. l.B.l7,

The word dhdrand is often found to have been used in the

plural numbert {(I;lI(Tg tTl(sTlg (.fanti-p. 300. 27, b4);errlqlg €cIR(: ( Asvamedha-p. 19.37 ).

4.

).

10 'An Introduction to the Yogasiltra

( D ) Patafrjali spoke of the oaiT'hara form of oairagla in'

1.15 which is the highest ( fourth ) stage of aparauiragla and

remained silent about its lower stages. The mention of the highest

stage of a yoga-practice without the mention of its lower $tages

that are naturally connected with the highest stage, undoubtedly

proves tbat the lower stages of the practice are known in the

tradition. Since none can attain the highest staqe without

acquiring mastery of the lower stages it is quite reasonable to

hold the aforesaid view. The non-mention of these lower stages

does not create any difficulty in comprehending the entity concer'

ned if the tradition is l iving.6

A similar example is found in the slttra mentioning the result

of practising prat2-ah-ara ( 2'55 ). Though the sitra speaks of

the supreme mastery ( paramd aaiyam ) of the sense organs

only yet there is no cloubt that there are lower forms of mastery

also. As mastery of these lower forms is absolutely necessary for

acquiring supreme mastery of the organs' it is quite reasonable

to conclude that these lower forms of mastery rvere known to

the pre-Patafljalian teachers. Some o[ these lower forms are

found to have been described by the commentators and by the

authors of later works on yoga. It would be quite illogical to

think that these lower forms were conceived by post-Patanjalian

teachers.

( E ) The YS. expressly mentions the name of the sarnPraiirAtu

sanadhi in 1.17 and uses the word anla ( other tha-n ) while

referring tothe asatnprajfr,ata sa:n-odhi' in s[. I 18. If anentity

6. That this fourfold division of aparauairag)a w^s known to

the practitioners of yoga is proved from its mention in

Satvata-tantn 3,12 b-13a. The printed reading of 12 b.

mentioning the names of the four kinds is corrupt and it

should be corrected ts q(crq) a{F(tfi qifias} qsilaf(:

or to other similar reading. These are described in

3. 16-2 I with a few corrupt readings ( The word

(dqt?: must be corrected to qdqrt: in 3.17 ). Vdcaspati

is right in holding that these stages were known to the follow'

ers of yogic traditi,:n ( utt|{f: tkerat ).

The existence of pre-Pata.jalian yogic tradition I I

is described without mentioning its actual name, it is evident

that the actual name of the entity was well known in the tradi-

tion. It is to be noted that the word anya cannot definitely

suggest that the rutme must be asantprajfi,dta ( samprajT'atabeingmentioned in l.l7 ). The name may be supposed to be either

ati-samprajT.ata or nis-sdmprajTatal , sdmprajfr'ata samddhi being

the inevitable means to asampraji',atu samddhi. and the latter being

far hisher than the former, for unlike the former the latter has

no oastu ( entity ) as a supporting object ( alambana). This

conrentration may be eiven even such names as have no verbal

similarity with the name santprajfidta. Thus it follows that the

name atatnpraji"dta was wellknown in the tradition and Patafrjali

thoueht it useless to use the word in sI. 1.!8. Patafl jali seems

to think that the senses to be suggested by the suggestive

(anuartha ) name asampraj-'ata may be easily known from its

definit ion given in siltra 1.18.

( F ) The Yoga.iltra speaks oI the process oi conquering two of

the five vital forces, namely Sam6na and Udana ( 3 3q-40 ).ft would be i l logicalto suppose that the practice ofconquering

the other three vital forces, namely Pr64a, Ap-ana and Vy-ana

were unknown to Patafrjali and his predecessors I We are of

opinion tha"t a partial treatment of a yoga-pra.ctice is indicativeof all those unstated prrts that are invariably connected withthe process.

It appears that the highly attractive character of the result(i. e. the luslre of the body) of conqr:ering Sam6.na and the extre'

7. Compare the name edtir with the namc fqaifq-the t*o

forms of samddhi in 1.46 and 1.51.B. It is gratifying to note that several yoga treatises deal with

the process of conquering all the live vital foraes with

respective resultsl Cp. Vivaraua : qtqi g€it;T: clsl: t dq{w€q

sesrq sqr?rf,l?Ti g qq] qafil r tvi g qq'tqrqJ flsqatq *quqrrf' 6q1e4li l: ( on YS.3.39 ). Mrgendratantra I a work of the

Ke{mira school of ,faivism ) speaks of the subjugation of all

the five vital forces in its yogap rda ( verses 45-48 ).

t 2 An Introducti<ln to the Yoga.siltra

melv conspicuous nature of the result (i. e' the death of ayogin

and the death at the will of celebrated Persons like Bhi;ma ) of

conquering Udana were the causes for mentioning the conquering

of these two vital forces only.

The process of acquiring di,alta Srotra ( divine ear ) in siltra

3.41 and the process of effecting indiscernibility of the colour of

the body in s-utra 3.21 are to be considered in this connection'

According to the principle stated abovediay Jrolrc must be

taken as implying the analogous powers like diuya cakEus, di'a2a

taac) etc. and the indiscernibility of colour as implying the

indiscernibil i ty of sound, touch. taste and smell. As colour is

prominent in the ernpirical world, indiscernibil i ty of colour has

been mentioned in the s-utra. Though the mention of di.u1a

cak;us is fiound more frequently thao diu2a irotra in ancient

literature, yet Patafljali thouglit it useful to mention diulta lrotra

irr the sitra. The reason for mentioning di'ay irotta is to draw

the attention of the aspirants to the importance oI the n-ad'a'

dharary-a ( which is superior to tine jltotir-d'harat4a ). As iabda and

ear are sdttai,ka they are usually read in the first place in the

enumerations of qualit ies and the sense organs' This may also

be taken to be a reason for mentioning lrotra in 3.4 I '

(G) The Yogasiltra is found to contain such discussions as are'incompletet i. e. it does not always speak of all those factors a

knowledge of which is indispensable for a full comprehension

of the subject discussed. As for example though Patarijaii says

that abhlt-asa and uai,rdgla are the means for restricting the cil'ta-

af t t is ( l^12) ,yetheis absolute ly s i lent about the process of

applying these two means for restricting them' It is needless

to say that the whole process was fully known to the predece'

ssors of Patafrjali.

Most of those words that denote yoga practice are to

be taken as known to the pre-Patafrjalian teachers, especially

if the intended senses of these words are not quite intelligible.

The word ekatatntabhyasc in YS. l '32 is an example of this

iprinciple. Though our assertion cannot be proved by direct

The existence of pre'Patafljalian yogic tradition l3 :

evidence, yet the frequent use of this word in different schools

of philosophy shows that the word ( as well as the practice

denoted by the word ) was known to the most ancient teachers

of yoga; oide Saasitya Up. I 7'28, Yogav-asisiha 6'69'27 and 48' '

A b s e n c e o f d e f i n i t i o n s o f a l ] s u c h e n t i t i e s a s r e q u i r e

to be defined, namely citta, v-asand, dosa' etc' also shows that

the nature of all these entities must have been fully known in

the tradition, It should be borne in mind in this connection

that an entity definecl by PataAjali must not be taken as'known

1o p26;jali for the first time" An entity known in the tradi-

tion and defined by ancient teachers is also defirred by later

teachers for various reasons' A definition is given for the PurPose

of not only showing the essential chirracteristic of a thing but

also referring to the causes or effects or to the process of realizing

or attaining it, or to the prool for proving its existence' Some-'

t imesade f i n i t i onbecomesnecessa ry tosu i t t hepecu l i a r cha ra ' c - 'ter of the new composition' Often a new definition is given

as the definitions of the former teachers are found to be not

so precise as are required' Ancient teachers were not very

pnrticular in using expressions precisely'

( H ) The use of non-technical words in technical senses

not stated expressly is a sound proof for holding that these

words in these sensrs are well known in the tradition'

YS. uses the word sfirla and canilro in the technical senses ol'

sarryada-ara and" candrailuaro respectively in 3'26-27' As these

words in these senses were well established in yoga traditionn

Patanjali did not think it necessary to use the words silrlad'udta

and, conilrailadro. ( Cp. the wotd' silryadadrq in Mupdaka-

u p . l . 2 . l l ) .

( I ) The use of a technical word in more than one sense

positively shows that the word had been used by different

teachers in difierent senses and a teacher of a later age used

the same word indiscriminateiy, for all of the senses were well

known in most of the schools of the same {estra' As for

example we find the .word asnrl 'a used in the sense of a parti-

l+ An Introduction to the Yogasutra

rlr;Jar kleia in su.2.6 and also in the sense of the material cause

of the organs in sil.3.47 ( aide Bhdsya also on su.Z.19 ).e

1J ) The s-utra 4.28 seems to contain a positive reference to

the pre-Pataiijalian treatises. The siltra means (cti I ageVt*tt+t-

rToti, Ql* qlwctfca qqfiT €?g{dq. Is there any need for using

the word uktam in this sfrtra ? Is it not proper ro say

€Iqlst qlqtqq i. e., ' the dwindling of these impressions of

the divergent state is like the dwindling of the affiictions ?' The

word uktamdoes not seemto serve anyuseful purposeifit is

understood in the sense of 'stated by me' (uktam maltd). lt is

sufiicient to say +ilvraq ( meaning slwcriqe ), for a reader

can easily find the siltras on the dwindling of the affiictions in

a previous chapter ( i. e. in the second p da ). All this showsthat uktam cannot be rightly interpreted to mean aktam rnoJ)Ai

It must be interpreted to mean v+d gaiarfi: ( stated by

the predecessors ) as has been expressly statcd by Vijnanabhiksu,

Thus the word uktam shows that the pre-Pataijalian treatiseson yoga contained elaborate discussions on the dh2anas thatwere capable of dwindling the impressions of the divergentstate, etc.

( K) The useof the words ayakhlat-e(L.++)and,uyakh1dtaly

( 3.13 ) seems to indicate the existence of actual treatises onyoga on which Patafijali based his work. Since the root caksa( from which the wo& altakhldta has been derived) means 'a clear

exposition of obscure ideas' ( TTaictt4 (qsactdqt4si f,aaturq )it is evident that the views propounded in the sutras were fullydiscussed ( using a similar terminology ) l:y the predecessors ofPatanjali. This also explains why Pataffjali preferred to use the

9. Ancient teachers expressly declared that confusion arisingas a result of such irregular use of words may be avoided

by taking shelter to traditional exposition; cp. the oft-quoted

sayi ng'aqteqlio} isiq-sfcqffffQ u;i6rczfrql{' r

The existence ofpre'Patafljalian yogic tradition l5

word alakhX,aro rather than ueditaala or ai'jfr,ey in a treatise that

chiefly deals with yoga-practice'lo

10. That the rvord ?qTaql( is sometimer used to refer to the

teacbings of the predecessors may be proved from the Vy5sa-

bhagya passage 3Td: sqla €Jetd fc{fdvtd 6{laqt(q ( on

YS.1.44 ). That the view of the subtlety of pradhdna wn"s

discussed by the predecessors of Pataflje'li may be inferred

from Sarirkhyakdrika B. It is well known that all the views

of theSa*khya-k l r ikdwereor ig inal lyd iscussedelaborate ly

in the $agtitantra-a work composed long before Patafljali'

varsaganyaosstatement'gfaaqafqslfat'atwatl qif(4 T?-

gsiisq' ( quoted in Vylsabhasya 3'53 ) shows that the

subtlety of pradhina was also discussed by him'

g

THE HTRATyYAGARBHI SAsrna-A PRE-

earalfrellAN TREATISE

While commenting on YS. l. I some commentators have

remarked that the YS' is based on a treatise called Hiragya-

garbha-yoga3estra,t named after its author Hirapyagarbha'

the creator. The existence of this treatise cannot be altogether

denied, for it is not only mentionod by a host of teachers of

various *estras but its statements and views are also found to be

quoted and referred to in authoritative works. ( Vidc the Appen-

dix for these statements and views; the word Hairanyagarbha

used in these passages refers either to the followers or to the

views of this $Istra ).The ascription of authorship to Hiranyagarbha, the creator,

shows that it is not a work of a particular person or of a few

persons definitely known in the tradition. We can reasonably

hold that the work in its original form was chiefly a compilation

of statements of unknown yogins of hoary past possessing great

authoritativeness. The date of this compilation cannot be deter'

mined historically.

Traditionally speaking, the statements of this treatise were

originally spoken by those sages who received divine knowledge

directly from Hiranyagarbha-the creator; it also contained

statements of those who were disciples of these sages' Receiving

divine knowledge from a deity is an established fact of2ogaaidld

(uideYS.2.44 \. It appears that after a long time these state-

f . ilI f€<oqqqTqlq{q q{il ;Ir?4: gdt<tiT qfla q]fqqraeerarg?: nriq6=aBaTtwr(qfrd'isfqc4rar6..{a q?+rtq qg{rucfuegq(q

( ats*o ); Bhikgu, guoting this verse of the YogiyEjnaval-

kya remarks s "f€qoqqri(afkgtealWrkfe"; "q{Fq F6<oq-q$qr ad {rt€* (crfq"""""( qfqcil i; "q}q: sqrfg:, (€rIT-

gsrtsd {ruaari-wteaq algqiq -'""'1 a}ugut6{). The verse

fqrua nuT qlrrtq'''''' is Brhati-yogiydjfr avalkya4mrti I 2.5.

The Hiragyagarbha (-astra

ments, on account of their being highly useful to aspirants,

were arranged properly and a definite form was given to

tbom so that the work could be taught to the disciples in a

proper way.

As time went on, this treatise came to be devetoped in'

various ways and statement$ of latcr yogins were incorpo'rated in it from dle to time. This developed treatise seems'

to have fallen in the hands of seoErian teaohers afterwards

and consequently seotarian redactions of this treatise pr€par-

ed by teachers of dif{erent sects came into existence. The

Vaiqr.rava sect Pafloaratra seems to have prepared a redaction

of tiris treatise.z The contonts of the Hirar.ryagarbha (astra

as given in the Ahirbudhnya Sa'lrhita (a work of Paflcaratra

school) in its chapter XII seem to belong to this redaction.

It appears that the Hirar.ryagarbha treatise was accepted'

by the followers of Saiva 6astra also. The Mahe(vara 6aiva(6.stra mentioned by Bbasa in the Pratim-ana,taka (S.l) was

rnost probably a Saivaite redaction of the Hiragyagarbha

(astra. The striking similarity of some of the fundamental views'

held by the two rival schools, viz. the Saiva and the Vaissava

school, must be due to their having a common sour@.

Tho Hiragyagarbha treatise (in its non-seotarian form)lost its importance in later period for ts'o reasons, namely(i) incorporation of a large numbor of its passages in subsc-quent works and (ii) composition of easily comprehensiblecompendiams on yoga. Gradually it fell in disuse and waslost. Non-mention of this treatise by Safkara in, his bha;yaon Br. SB. 2.1.3 iodioates that by the time of Safikara thcwork became extinct. Mention of this treatise by Ramenuja

and other post-Sankara teachers doss no! prove that thotreatise was in actual existence in their times, for they were

aware of this (astra by name only and knew o[ iis views

.Faq€c{ (Ahir. 12.3l), g<9fa-qq{ (12.1?) and cqrcafrsur}tftaq (12.37), given to the,Hira$yagarbha 6astra, show that a subsequent redaction,of this treatise assumed a Vaiqpavaite character.

t7

18 An Introduction to the Yogasotra

through tbe Puranic works and the oral tradition. It appdirs

thlt some of the verses quoted in the Vyasabbasya and other

works on yoga (wirhout any mention of their source) belong

to the llirapyagarbha Sastra.s

Tbe Purapic authors regarded the Hiraqyagarbha Sastr^as belonging to hoary pas!. That is why the Visr.rupurala(2.13-14) connects this treatise with Bharata (Ja{a Bharata),of the dynasty of Sva,yambhuva Manu. Thus it oan besurmised that acoording to the Purar.ric authors this treatisewas compiled long before the period of the Bha.rata war.

Though in some of tbe Purinas Hiraqyagarbha is said to

be a 1si (tlirapyagarbhena $iqa) yet this cannot be taken to

that He was a human being_ The Puraqas in their chapters

rmean on creation declare that Hira+yagatbha is a rqi

on account of His omnipresence (Blih sarvagatatvena,

Ktrma-p. 1.4.60). The Jyotsna comm. (on H. Y. P. 4.15)

informs us that Hirar.ryagarbha, VasiE[ha, Narada, Sanat-

kumS,ra and others are to be known as janmasiddhaq.

.Janmsiddha simply means 'one whose siddhis are innate.' As

a highty perfected being is born as a Hiragyagarbha there is

no logical fault in using the word janmasiddha for Him.

The mention of Hiraqyagarbha, Kapila, Ap-antaratamas

Srikaggba and Narayana as the promulgators of Yoga,'sarirkhya, Vcda, Pa6upata- Sastra and Paflcarata-{astra (Santi'

p.349.64 ff ) dois not show that Hiranyagarbha was a

human being as the list oontains the names of both the divine

and tbe human beings.

3. Some passages of the Hira+yagarbha treatise arc foundto have been quoted in the bhagya by SaRkara on theSanatsujatiya. seorion cf the Mahabbatata. We do notconsider this Sairkara as identical with the scholiast of theBrahmastrtra as tbe bha;ya on the Sanatsujatiya secdoncontains statoments of teachers posterior to Saikaracalya.

4coNTENTS oF THE HTRANyAGARBHA SAsrna es

STATED IN THE AHIRBUDiltqye SettAHrfAWe have already said that the topics discussed in the

Hiragyagarbha 6dstra as given in the Ahirbudhnya-sa,irhitadoes nor belong to the original text bur to its Vaiqnavite redac-tion. As the names of the topics bear sinilarity with sorneof the words in rbe YS,, an atte npt is inade here to showthe import of these names We have sone differences withMr. Chakravarri who has dealr with these names in his O;D. S S T (pp. 70-71 ). The relevanr versesin thesa*rbi taas are follows :

ksqdfi?qdTd q{q fr.n{sfiscq tr I I

Qro+rufgqqd e€a riaq qqq ryg I

anl l61oa'rfqr d clsi *qdfiit rr f fq;fiT fctqfrrrracr wifrw6+rsw rdFErr g fctqrreqr il? arE{sn Edr n ilarsrRr"cqTef g qJqildTq(: q({ Isqq{iFrs ffi"' dqrferc6r{6, qq il iysT€Trff" drr q aQwtarferr<q If<ffiq]rrraurtr{ q Xotfrrn<qie s lt l\fsldqlqreq{r ftfq frao'aqd: q<{ rqfr arc{r ?iil€A Rqtqr: c-dtfror: rr iqsgct rrkercoq gtrs: rddl6ei- rqnrnfqfr c]+or c<t €qrfuqmfi rr iuerqrrrra<otor d qFq ldftt eqi ralrrqvtrea srrerlqlil freqrkwr{ tr legeihnr fsuoilrftd ilq sqTci: I

( Atrir. t2.31--39a ) the printed reading f 5fq (gga)is gra nm rtically wrong and metrically defective; it snoutibe corrected to d qfq as shown here.

20 An Introduotion to the Yogastttra

It is stated in tbis Sarirbitd ( 12.31-33 ) that Hiragya-

garbha composed two sarirhitds on ]o$a; one on nirodhayogc

ind tbe othir on katmayogahaving twelve and four ohapters

i *ri"o i*rot; i.tp.ciiotly ( one tontra for each topic )'

Wlit. the sanrhita on nirod'ha seems to treat of the whole

field of sam6dhi with its sub-divisions' mean-s' etc' the

sarhhita on katmayogd seems to treat of suoh aclions as are

favourable to Yoga.

Tanta I called ahga : z{hga evidently means the eight

ahgas of yoga mentioned in YS. 2' 29' The wotd ddya sbows

that this is the first topic of this treatise'

Tafira II called dosa z Since it has been discussed after

the ahgas of yoga, dosc'undoubtedly refers to those blcmish-

es thai are iradioated Uy the yogdhgas' It is the same as

aiuitdhi in YS. 2'25. (ntt tniititt known as aiuddhi may

com€ under closa; vidi ys. 2 43 and the Bh-alya on 1.47,

2.1r2.27, anA 4.3 ) ' That-th€ doqas form one of the most

imporiant'sobjects 6f yogaviyda is,-a well-kuown fact' The

ffi;;";; on si'irkhya-voiu in the Sao'dparvan speak of dosas

io nor" than one ptacet, which seem to have been based on

the teachings of the ancient teaohers of yoga' The Vyasatrha-

;; -;i*

6eaks of various kinds of doY\'-"f*v.,tuzrj;r

ii.r sj, qeia<aqqqriqf6er*v ( z'to.), -c^q3u ^( 111]--ltl;iuu yS. utto speaks o1 Aqfreqq ( 3'50 )' A statemtot,-ol

some former teacber says that it is the _dosrr tlrat gNes rlse

to prima fori, niiit(-.]u,E iwi gdr& ifq$sfu' quoted in

Bhl;]a 4.25 ).Tantro III called ttpasarga: Since the topic upasutga.is

taken up after dogats if is tiusooable to take it as referring

;; ;i; iituravo, (' obstacles ) to voga -ul *t find in Ys' 1'30'

ihe word in thissense has been used by prominent teachers'

In a srrtra of Devala we find an enumeration of lheupasargas

I cp. i**asrq.stqfgq"" (Santi-p. 24O' 4-6);rm tlq""<]sq

q=dan ( Santi-p. 300. 11 ); ce AqF. cql ?4"' '""

i santi-p. 301. 54-5? ). The Sanatsujdtiya section also

speaks of dos.os elaboratelY.

Clontenrs of rhe Hirapyagarbha (astra ZI

'.(quoted in Moksakd+cla, p. 2I2\. The Markagdeya-p. speaks"of alarge nu lber of upasargas in ch. 40. Though the wordupasligd is sometimes used in connection with certain super-normal powers ( see YS. 3.3i ) indicrting rhereby thatthese powers are impediments to the realization of the purupa,principle yet it would not be propcr to take the word intb is sense.

Tantru IV called adhip!hanaka ; Mr. Chakravarri rhinks.thal the imporr of rhis word is not olear. We however aroof the opinion that this word is to be taken here in rhe sense.of living organism with its functions as viewed by rhe yogins.A living organism is usually called bhogdyatana or bhogE-dhis.l hdna almost in all the schools of philosophy (vir)eblrcgadhispl tdne iar i re, Bhapya 2,5; cp. Sa*. Su. 5.144). i ris reasonable to take up the topic of the body before theadhans (the topic of the 5rh tantra) meaning ,the bodilyregions for practising dharana.'

Tuntv Y called ddhEra,. According to Mr. Chakravartithe import of this word is not quite clear. We howeverthink that the word refers to the dha-rcna-ileios ( bodilyregions on which dbaraga is ro be fixed ), yide the expresoion,sudui radhE'a-bandhana in Halhayogapiadipika ( j. Zg ).f. som" works deits or ddhd,'as arc called dirayas oriuuhdirayas.z

TanffaYl.Tbe name of the topio, according to theprinted reading, is 'yogatit ca bahistattvddhika-ravat,, whiohevidently seems to be corrupt. The absence of ihe wordlantra with reference to this topic is conspicuous Again,the word yoga ( being masculine ) cannot be consrrued withbuhistattvddhikdravat, which is neuter. It is not understoodwhy the author did not use the expression as ,yogaicabshistattvddhilcd,'aydn' which is berefr of all these faults.

Let us leave the question of rhe reading and take the expres-sion itobis as yogas'ca bahistaftvadhikaravan. The expression

2 Tide Yisnu-p. 6 ! +5 (eritAi dd: giqtd frqii io: TqrTA).See also S irkara's renrarks on Sanatsujatiya section 2.2g(eqrc +dq: ofeiRaq {rTr$TA cuss$qrd iioqr<r+E s;irdr-fs€ac qFr:).

22 An Introduotion to the Yogasrltra

may then be explained to mean 'yoga that has no externa!

""iiry "r its objeit'. Mr. Chakravarti ina! be rightin explaining

i , u ' . . ' u . f o r m o f y o g a i n w b i c h a n e x t e r n a l o b j e c t i s s e l e c t .ed :s the substralurr of meditrtion as is found in Yogastttra

i.gS-f O.' His further re'narks that 'meditations of these

dp". ut" termed as sabiia samddhi io 1.46 because they

#e tteir origin to concentrating the mind o-l an external

ob3eot' are quite valid. The word bahirvastubija in Bhdsya

t.LO f conoerning the four samdpattis ) is to be considered

in this conneclion. It is also possible to take the expressi-on

as referring to the rhree bahl'an a means to the nirbt'ja

samddhi, namely dhirap'd, dhydna -and sanddhi' This

explaaation is in consooance witn rhe former topic ( Aandra

meaning the places of dhd'raPt' ).

TawtdYII catted riktayoga,' the word dkhya ( name )

suggests that the expression riktayoga is the aotual name of

the topic. According to Mr Chakravarti it means suob

types ol yoga where there is no substratu:u of. meditati-on

uoO it is -Ueiter

known as asamprajfrata ( 1'18 ) ot nirbiia

samddhi ( 1.51 ) in rhe YS'. We however are in favour of

taking this wo.d as referring to such samidhis as are ii:63pu-

ble o1 leading one to isolation. The samddhi known as

bhavapratyaya is one of the samEdhis of this kind' The

ptacing oi this topic before pi'p i1'ogn ( rhe eighth topic-)

meaning 'tbe samddhi that leads tr the supreme goal'

shows tbut oo. explrnation is nearer to the sense intended

by the aurhor. The riktayoga may be the same as or similar

ro the abhdvayoga of the Puranas.s Most probably the

printed reading of the name is corrupt.

Tdntta VIII catled purnayoga: According to us it means

rhe highest for,n of samddhi, (i.e. asamp;aj"ndta ), which

invariibly leads to kcivalyc a . Accordiog to lvlr. Cbakravarti

3. v i i te Li i rya-p. 2.55.7 f f . and Siva-p.7 2'37.9 for a

definition of abhdv ayogd, one of the forms of yoga'

4. It rnay be surmised that' pf 'yttltoga refers to the Dharina-

megha sam6dhi, for it contains vivekakhv-ati in its fully

develoPed form ( YS. 4.29 ).

Contents of tbe Hlra4yagarbha Sasrra 2t'pu-:rya yoga is hinted in yS. 3.52-54 which deal with tbenature And results of vivekaja jidna, This is doubtful. Asdiscri ninative knowledg e (v iv ekaj a-jidna) does not i nvariablylead one to isolation it cannot come under the purview ofpil,pa yoga.

Tantnas IX-XI called siddhiyoga: Mr. Chakravarti rhinksthat siddhi-yoga refers to the supernororar powors as describedia the third pdda of the yS, Though this explanationapparently seems plausible , yet there is a difficulty in accep_ting it. siddhiyoga is said to have been dealr with in threechrpters (tantras). Is there any justification for devoting threechapters (in a work of l2 chapters) in describing sufernor-mal powers ? Will it be right to sur,roise that rhere was atriparrire division of these powers and that each chaprcr dealtwith one kind of powers only ? Suoh a division is found nei-ther in the Yoga phirosophy (which desoribes ail siddhis inonc chapresr) nor in ltihisa-purdga literature nor in the workson Haghayoga, orc. Either we are ro accepr that in tbe Hira-rlyagarbha sa irhita the siddhis were divided into rhree groups,namely jidna, icchd and kriyd ot we are ro think of anotne.explanation of rhis term.

In this connection we may consider the gq113 .trividho"mokgh' of the Tattvasamzsasrrtra (ZZ.) as a matrer of factuit is not the proper mokya that ii divided here into th,eJaspects but the rhree means to mok.sa, namely (i) jrtana, (ii\rdgaksnya and (iii) krtsnaksayas or rihgakp.rydthatare sratedr

5. In tbe verse arrs*g qls] f,ric fintq) rrrrderffitr I F€.HflqEfrqq aqTarlto ftroe{qq u tbe reading Erquqq is corruprand it sbould be corrected to gtrlqrq; vide Jayamai.rgaldon S6rl-ka-. 45. for the above quoted verse, and Bhikqu,s,comm. on YS. | 24 , 4 .25 , 4 .30 , 4 ,32 . In the chapters onthe Kapilisuri-samv6da ($6nri-p, Kumbhakonam ed.),weffnd the verse ,€r{rlqqradq;q:

z,€{qrqrqrTqlq I zfilq8T{ ;rqlqlfcarc-xq{sqii to': n v;de aiauu'rvqa \i-'(Adui *",iand Bh6vrgaqesa,s comment thereon. A somewhat similardescription of these three kinds of mokpa is to be foundin Vayu-p. 102. 29-80.

24 An Introduction to the Yogasrttra

here as moksa.The word siddhiyoga maymeanrthrec mebns'

if it is analysed as siddhyartho yogap, i. e', yoga' meaning

.updya,mcansr for attaining siddhi, i e'; tbe highest siddhi'

wbich is no other than isolation (kaivalya)' These three mgans

are knoqn asviveka, para'vairdgya and nitodha in the P6tan-

jala system. As our opinion is somewhat ooojectural tbe im-

port of the word siddhiyoga is still to be determined'

Tantra XII calted moks.a ( emancipation )

Regarding the second part of the Hira4yagarbha sanihita

ralled Karmayoga it is stated that it has two seotions dealing

with ndnd-kaf mans and ekaktiyd respectively. In the expres-

.sion cJEdI q<r €+rt*'qtq{t, g'<t is to be known as eTq<t and

q{Thil is to be read as qfiftsut, it being an example of the

KarmadharaYa comPound.

The difference between ndni-karnans and ekakriyd isnot

quite clear. Does ekakriyE means such practices zs ekatattv-s'

inyato (Ys. 1.32) and the like. lf eka is taken in the sense

ti'p,riaiar", i. ".'

the principal acts then ekaktiyd may refer

roLrtydiosa of YS. 2. l. NanEkantrdr seems to mean all

those actions that are conducive to the purification of the

.mind.

Each of these two topics is said to bave two sub-divisions :

internal and external. Tt appears that this distinotion is based

on the dlambanas or sddhanas (means). Such a distrnction is

found to bave been stated in a stttra quoted in the Vydsabh-

6sya (4. l0; i *d""""). It is statcd here that 'friendliness,

ut". 1tt "t are to be ouitivated by all aspirants of yoga) are

noi contingent on the achievement of things that are external;

charity, etc , are not of this kind, for they depend upon ex:

ternal factori.' At our explanations of ekakriyd and ndndkriyd

and our views regarding the nature of their subdivisions are

based on the present state of our knowledge of the yoga-trea-

tises, they are capable of being correct€d on the basis of

pr.oit. descriptions of these factors given in the yoga texts

not known to us.

y/" At),,i l9SA WRONGLY CONCEIV PRE-PATANTAIIeU

s0rnn ) oN YocATREATISE (

In this Introduction there is no

preoisely about the pre-Patafrjalian treatises on yoga. That

in anoient times extensive treatises on yoga were oomposed

by sages is beyond doubt,l Statements of suoh ancient

teachers as Jaigiqavya? and Varpagalya3 are found to have

been quoted in authoritative works. It appears that all ancient

works on yoga were lost afte r the composition o[ the

Yogastrtra. Sincc all the essential views of the ancient

teachers were precisely stated by Patanjali these works

l. Cp. Devala's statement, "qe1 qteqqJ,rT aifeAi+ E {{qqdeq g4xuitmFr flqflorfr qrrft<rfq 6qpi1q drwl vq?m}qewi ( Apararka's oomm. on Y6j.'sml'ti 3. 109 ).

2. A defiinition of pratydha-ra given by Jaigrqavya ( k+-

or.qrarflaqf*ife trfreaq: ) has beon quoted in Vyd'sa-

bhdpya 2.55. Vlcaspati in his Tatparyatrkl 3 . 2. 42 it'

forms us that Jaigisavya composed a treatise on dh6'ra$a.

3. That Vlrgrganya was a propounder of yoga has been

expressly stated by Vh.caspati in Bhdmatt 2. l. 3 ( qlq-

{rIF:i ag-cclEFril attQ tq qrlETTd qflftruq: ). Ao aphoristic

stltement of this sage on the absence of distinction in

pradhd.na bas been quoted in Vydsabhdlya on YS. 3.53.

4. A similar case is found in tbe field of Vyakarapa. Since

Pdgini's As[adhyayi contained all the essential views

of his predccossors, the works of these teachers fell in

disuse and oonsequently werc lost.

26 An Introduction to the Yogastrtra

Popular presentation of the views of ancient yogine aswe find in ltihasa purlnx literature is atso one of thecauses of the decay of the original works on yoga. Thereare reasons to believe that the ItihSsa-purdlic presentatirinis not always faultless; ia a good number of cases rhe viewsof ancient yogins as presented in this lirerature do not seemto follow faithfully the original reachings.

Some soholars aro of the opinion that at the time ofSaikaricdrya there existed a yogio trearise ( in sutra ), thefirst sntra ( namely BTst drEssi*crq) frrr: ) of whioh wasquoted by him in his Sdrirakabhdsya on Br. .srr . 2.1.3.Though tho existence of such an ancient treatise io the timeof Saikara is not altogerher impossible, yet a considerationof the relevant passage reveals that the aforesaid statementcannot be taken as belonging to some text on yoga.

The BhdEya read*s: *firtgisFq s{q atq<si,T}qlfr dTr qksrqrr*hlrqq*,ii* firrlssf it faqi. Ir canbe easily undir-srood thar_sioce atq atsEsiicr* *q: is ro be regarded as thefirst $trtra ( as is suggesred by the word atha ) it musr belongto a definite work on yoga. Now, a sratement of a definitework on yoga oannor be rightly cited as belonging to yoga-(dstra, unless the word is used loosely. As for exampti wec19no-t rightly say a{rs{srqfiet '1k11iE qE"qA, for the srrrra1ffia telongs to a particular"work ( i. i. rho Asgiidhyayrof Pairini ) of grammar. Even if this iirtra is founi- in moiethan one treatise on grammar, yet it would not be properto assert that the stttra belongs to Vyakarana.gastra.

On the other hand a doctrine or a view can be riglrtlyregarded as belonging to Vyakaraqa-(z,stra; as for example itcan be rightly said that 64rr6{EtTt€{' srd}; fSqIsTfSC{qqSrrreTA( here the statemeot sto): F*arcrFa<aq refers to a doctrine ofgrammar ), for the doctrine is accepted in Vyakara$a-(estrai. e., all or almost all rhe schools of grammar. Sarlkarahas himself used the word qlq{1*q in the proper scnse ofthe word in the sentence qErflfr;ttqlwrffislqqqkfr frqsntt'

A wrongly conceived pre'Patafljalian treatise 27

(sariralcabhatya 4. l. l0 )in whioh a view is said to have

L".n ptopounded in YogaSastras

Tho above consideration shows that the passage as

orinted is corrupt and it is not reasonable to draw a conolu-

.ioo oo the basis of a corrupt reading'

There are strong grounds to doubt about the genuine-

n"o, of ah" afo"esald putsugt' If this senrcnce is oompared

*Lu ,it,

precetling uod tn. following senrence it would

uoo.u" thai this passage has no relevance in the present

"L:"".

-Srokara 'ar fiist says warrgrtnuawfr R mfi .+a

faF6a: and quotes a Br'-up' lasryFe .with a view to corrobo-

;;li;g it. He then quores a Svet-aSvatara passage to show that

,U" ui, of practising ;sanas is Vedic, and this is followed

Ut "it*

Upanisadic passages bearing the word yoga' After

,Uir $u*tutu ,t*t the passage in question and shows the

o"noio.ioo in the folloging state'l)€ot : "qdl6q[ffi-'{6?q€'u

..... :.. ....qaqs<ff qt sfssqfle. "

OFs can easily understand that the passage *rrcnrfsFcqdt fuqi is quite out of point in the present context. As.

Soiluru;i intention is to show tbat yoga is accepted by the

il;;;;.;. is no reason for Sankara to assert, on the

autUority of a yoga text, that YogaSastra acoeptes yoga as

a means ro samydg-cla,'iana.- This positively shows thar

there arose no occasion for Sarikara to quote a statemeut from

somc yoga text with a view to showing the purpose of yoga'

Thus ii may be concluded that sarikara, a.fter stating fosiqrft q +fE+'rF{""q|d iscrfrf,{, immediately brought forward

5. In very rare cas€s the word 6a,stra is used in the senseof 'a particular literary composition on a i-astra'; Tho

word in this sense is sornetimes used in plural number;cp. dalmt{q in Sariraka-bhisya 3. 2- 18. That 5a'stradoes not chidfly mean 'a literary composition' (gtantha)may be determined form Medhatithi's bhaqya on Manu1.58. Though the word (a.stra is found in the names ofliterary compositioot (.p. Nagya$astra of Bharam andArtha*r.stra of Kaugilya) yet this does not invalidateour view.

28 An Introducdon to the Yogastrtra

tbe conclusion embodied in the sentence qe: dskqqrta?qreqit""""qfsardtfr.

It is diffioult to believe that in $eiikara's timc a higbly

authoritative ancient work on yoga (in sutra) was in existe-

nce, for no other statement from this work has been quoted,

either by S:rikara, or by his dircct or indirect disciples, or

by any teaoher belonging to the minor sohools of yoga.6

It appeara that the aforesaid passage was a marginal noteby some teacher and it was copi:d afterwards in the bodyof the Bhaqya by some scribe inadvertently. The author ofthe marginal note wrote it to serve his own purpose. (Wehave already shown that it was not necessary for S:rlkara tosay so). He seems to have based his note on such stateoenls ofSrnkaia as dEqsi;Trrqqlzns qlq]'"" "' ( Bhasya on Mur.rdaka-up.3, I. t).? It is to bi'noted in this connection that no oommen-tator of the S-'r,rirakabh6qla said anything on this passagewhich bears such an important information about yoga.

6. Brahm-ananda (tAth century) in his comm. on H. Y. P.4.15 quotes srq dqilt{rrqqrfr *rr:,( and explains tuitbyatman ) as a statement of some Sruti. Since no avail-able Sruti text contains tbis passage, we aro inclined tobelieve that the very passage 3Tq dt{Esiictfr fr{: hasbeen referred to here by Brahm-ananda in a elightlVdi(ferent form. Since the srarement qq cffiEsiq]ctq] frTr:is an artificial sentence ( i."., it is a marginal note andnot an actual sentence of some Sruti text ) it is quitenatural thrt in later times the sentence came to beread in a slightly different form.

7 . It appelrs that a oertain treatise on yoga contabed thestatement frWAtqgrqFi: ( see tbe Vivara{ra comm. onYS. 2.28 ) and it is quite likely that the author of themarginal note based his statement sTq dir{Estfrqrfr frq: onthis very sentence. The word atha in this sentenoe seemsro be a scribal eror or an example of {qrflqfe as theSanskrit soholars would say.

CHAPTER II

. THE COMPOSIT-ION OF THEYOGASUTRA

ICOHERENCE iN THE FOURFOLD DIVISION

OF THE YOGASfiTRA

The YS. has been divided into four chapters ( padas ),namely samldhi, sddhana vibbrrti and kaivalya. Tbe usc ofthe word p6da is significant, for it signifies the fourth part.l

It is an established doctrine that a knowledge of coher-ence ( saitgati ) thar lies in the arrangement of the partsand the sections of a rrearise is highty helpful in comprehen-ding the narure of rreatment adopted by thc author. Thatis why the commentators are often found to show ooherencelying in tbe arrangement of the adhydyas, p6das and adhika-fa+as; vide the commentaries on the Brahmas0tra and theMrma sislrtra.

The commentators of the YS. have also shown coberencein the arrangement of the p6das. For example the Bh6gya,while commentiog on the first sirtra of the second p6da,disaloses the relation thar exisrs between the first and thesecond pida in the following words : (yoga attained by aperson with a concentrated mind has been stated ( in thefirst p6da ); as to how a person whose mind is restless ordistracted can attain yoga is going to be considered now( i. e. in tbe beginning of rhe second p6da ), ( vqF<e:sqftq""""""qrruqa ). This passage of the Bhdqya clearlyshows that the means stated in the flrst pdda are more subtlcthen those in the second p6da. Tbe coberence of the first

l. cp. crq: q'st:, aFcqnrq rE{, cWrecTF:, $qlqqril (Niruk-ta 2. 7 ); on qgqlqsq'fe: Durga observes : Tgr{trIqTrTFzIIq.

32 An Introduction to the Yogasrrtra

threo pd.das has been clearly shown by Vdcaspati and the

Vivara4a.s

A study of the arrangement of the topios reveals that itdoes not follow the principle of a graduated scale. That iswhy the arrargement is nol at all belpful to the persons ofmodern times in understanding the dootrines of yoga in aneasier way. One can easily observe that while the frrst padaprescribes means for a person possessing a tranquilmind. the second p-ada presoribes those means that are usefulfor a distracted mind. According to the modern view, themeans useful for a distracled mind should have been disous-sed ar first. Again, while samddhi has been dsfined in therhird p-ada, the varieties of samddhi have been described inthe first pada, It must be noted that ancient teachers havetheir own technique of composition and unless the nature oftho teohnique is known, a criticism showing faults, anomalyor irregularity in the arrangeoent of topics in tbe YS. doesnot carry anY weight.s

2, sqqkd'tqqTElrqt {cfsedEslffi a}+aq I diitqql? fficEta-1-

gotl: aa\<vr<Qae] krlaai EEiFqI: I dl{s {4qsit{T: I

dqq{s $dl{slrEqliT€filaugru efo frqftmuawl qsqFq{s

*rrrelir+a) aQ<qi+alswle,{?zT€rlF((ei{il4l fr fr q-a1qilvfqa

meq'lwqrq:( T. vai. 3. 1 ). serq qla sqlfrx sT€TFAc fqfile: t

frfit atsrqqfq aqrcqtilfc r qfft g srwrEsiqTaiq'irngEs5n11'

q5.e-ilri€dgtoi 6ilq t"""ilEq *seq cfldqqF{sific cfeclE-

ritufq6 e-<'**easrcrgmcsi ftrqt ( Viva'arya 4' 1 )'

3. As for example though the Nyayastrtra enumerates the

categories in the order of sr{Ft, sta, tvla""""in the

uddei a-siita ( I . 1 . I ), vet at the time of examining their

characteristics it considers tctmidya at first ( in 2. 1. 1 )'

and then the pramdy.as. To a modero reader lhis may

seem to be an example of anomaly, but ancient teachers

did nor find any fault in not following the order shown

in str,ra l. l. 1. On the contrary they adduced strong

reasons to justify the view of Gotama.

Cohcrenoo io tbe fourfo&il divbion

A crreful study of the division in pddaa shop3 tha[-tbe-YS. has two broad divisiors: the frrrt (l-2 padas) dealingchiefly wit'r various kinds of samddhis and the means foracquiring rhem, aod the seoond (3-a padas) dealiog wirh tbe.secondary and prirary resulrs of yoga practice. The discus.sion oo d,aflf, dyiya, etc (in the second pada) has not bec*taken up indspendently bur as part of the four-fold delibera-tic.n known as dgq€ karr (v;de Bhaqya on YS 2.15) associ-atcd wich misrries whose cau$es are to be uprooted with tbe,help of sam-adhi. Tho purpose of the discussbn on karmanand on the relation berween the objects and their oogoitioa(or the mind, citta) in the fourth pd.da is ro show rhe rvayof acquiring the knowledge of the narure and funotions ofthe n-rind so that the aspirants would be able to attaio discri-minative wisdom. Since a knowledge of mutation, attributesand substance is necessar! for comprehending the nature ofthe super-normal powersra these pow€rs have been dealt withafter the discussion on mutation etc.

Eaoh of the aforesaid two divisions seems to bave twoparts. In the first part of rhe first division ( i. .., in the firstpAda) the higber and the highest means bave been discussed,while in the second parr (i. e., in the second ptda) the easierm€ans and auxiliaries of yoga (yogahqas) leading rc samddhihave been described. Similarly in the first part of the seconddivision (i. e. in the third oida) the exrernal or secondaryresults of yoga practice (i. e., the supernormal powers) havebeen described, while in the second part (i. e., in the last orfouJth p-ada) the highest goal of yoga practice (i. e. leaivalya)with allied topics has been discussed.

4, Some scholars are found to render vibhuti by Gabnormalpower', whioh is not only wrong but also rnisleading.There is no abnormality ol unnaturality in the yibiut'sand their rise is in full accordance with the narure of thethtee gunas. Philosophically these powers musr be regar-ded as normal. We prefer the use of .supernormal power,since the rise'of the siddhis depends upon some particu.lar forms of yoga practice.

33.

34 : An Introduction to thc Yogasntra

. tfbc order of the topics discussed in the YS' is as follons i

The ffrst pdda (chapter) deals with cittavltti; dhect and

indirect t."o, to tiuinirodia with its results; kinds of yoeic

knowledge called sa'mdpatti.The second cha-pter deals. *ith

yoga for those who are easily overcome by affiictions (!l*9;

affior;on and its varieties; karma'samskiras caused by affiict-

ions; sufferings and their'causes; Wgahgas as means of iradica-

ting impuritiis or ignorancel the external y.ogahgas.' The thjrd

chapter deals with the internal ahgr's; sgl!)!U!, tbe comtind

form of these ahgas; the results (i. e.' supernormal powers)

of sartyama. The fourth chapter at first conrains sone conclu-

ding rimarks on siildhis and then deals with karman and

subliminal impressions (vdsands); the nature of a thing lvastu)and its relation with the citta; the nature af cittal internal

means to i-glation- (kaivalya).

As the logical basis of placing these topics one after the

other is fairly clear, we refrain from holding a disoussion

on it.A question may arise regarding the coherence in placing

the eight angas (accessories) of yoga into two separate chap-

rers. Ir is found that while the first five ahgas with their

,results are stated in the second cbapter (2.30'35), the last.three ahgas with their resutts are stated in the third chapter.

As to why all the yogdhgas ( with their respective results )

have not been discussed in ono and the same cbapter is a

matter that requires grave consideration.

Some may say that since the first five ahgas are external

or indirect (bahirahga) and the last three ahgas are internal or

.direct (antarahga), the last three have beeu placed in a diffe-

rent chapter. This does not seem to be a satisfactory explana-

tion, for sthe state of being internal' is relative, r'ide YS' 3'8

which says that a direot ahga is regarded as external if it is

'cooeidered in connection with the nirbiia tbrm of samddtti

( concentration ).We are of the opinion that the eight' ahgas (accessories)

have been discussed in two different obapters on account' of the

Coherence in the fourfold division

fundaoertal difference in the character of their results (i. c.,the siddkis, p;rfections or supernormal powers). To beexplrcit; the superoormal powers arising from the praoticeof rhe first fivc d,ccessories ( rn"ntioned in 2. 5 ff. ) are ,,oi

caused by saityama. They arise even without the applica-tion of will. Moreover the field of rhese powers is limitedin comparison to that of the powers descrihed in the thirdp-ada. All of the powers in rhe second chaptor are causedby mantra and tapas ( vide YS. 4,1 ), while the siddhis inthe third ohapter are caused by dhdrand, dhydna and sam-odhi.Some of the powers in the second chapter may arise evsn in

suoh persons as hrve not made much progress in acquiring

tattvajifina ( knowledge of reality ).

The Vivaraqa comm. is of the opinion that sincc dhdrend,

ilhyfina and samadhi aat conjointly they have been discussed

in a separate chaprer ( d6a'+rfreeTEq gTEriraqe+ yrr.aT{q ).This does not seem to be well-based. It is true that inaoquiring samyama these three ahgas ( accessorics ) areapplied togeth:r but while practising ithdrapd or dhydna nohelp from dhydna or samddhi respectively is needed. Morc-over one can easily understand that a developed stage ofpratyihdra enables one to pracdse more successfully thchigher stages of lower accessories, namely prdpa-ydma, dsanaetc. and similar is the case with prdnaydma. This showthat sdmhatyakdritva ( acting in collaboradon with another )in some form exists in thc accessories other than the afore-said tbrec also.

35

2IS THE FOURTTI PADA A SUBSEQUBNT ADDITION ?

Some scbolars are of the opinion tbat the fourth pa,da

( ohapter ) of the Yogasritra, ohiefly treating of kaivalya

and Oealing witb karman, v6'sao-a, and the relation between

;j;;fftheir know"i l rnto 1, is a later addition' The

following arguments are udvanced to prove this assertion :

( i ) Ths extent of the fourth pada { chapter ) is dispro-

portionately small, as it contains only 34 strtras whereas

the number of tho strtras in the first three ohapters b 51.' 55

and 55 respecrively. ( ii ) There is a marked change ( due

either to iti supplem.otuty character or to the manipulation

rt ; foreign nana 1 in the style of the fourth chapter as

ogmpared with the style of the firsr three ehapters' ( iii )

The srrt.as ( f O'f+ ; ln tbe fourth chapter seem to repeat

*nut nut alr"ady blen said in the seoond chapter' ( iu )

Some of the topics introduced in the fourtb chapter are such

that they could well have been dealt with in a more relevan[

manner in oonnection with similar discussions in the preceed-

i"g- onupt"t.. ( u ) Most of the criticisms against the

nriCOnfts occu, in ihe fourth chapter' ( vi ) The.doctrines

of yoga are described in the first three chapters and tt Is tne

fr*tn' chapter where the views of the opponent schools

are criticizei. ( vii ) The putting of the word iti at thE end

of the third cbapter' evidently indicates that with this srrtra

Patafljali's Yogasirtra ends. ( viii ) The word iti used at

the end of thJfourth chapter shows that this obapter was

" *"putut. composition, whiich was incorporated in the body

of the YS. ( having the first three - ohapters ) afterwards'

i, *..*, to' have been oomposed by a person who was

anxious to supply some new links of argument wbich were

felt to be necessary for strengthening the Yoga position

iro^ uo internal point of view as well as for defending the

Vog":po.iti"o f.om the supposed attack$ of Buddhist

metaphYrics.

Is the f<iurth pada a subsequent addition ? 37

Tbe aforesaid arguments have been given by D;,Dasgupta ( H. I. P., I. pp. 229-230 ). Dr. Radhakrishnanalso holds rhat the fourth chapter is a larer addition andrefers to Dasgupta's work ( I. P., II. p. 341 ) withoutgiving any additional reasons.

On a closer examination it would appear that thesearguments hardly stand any serious scrutiny. Some of themare ill-founded, for they are not supporred by the establishedprinciples of literary composition adopred by our ancicnrleachers

Let us examine the first argument. If we take into consi-deration the number of strtras in different padas, ahnikas oradhyayas in the ancient works on Vyakar-aga, Chandas,Kalpa. erc. it would appear that ancienr teachers had noregard for proportion so far as the number of sfrtras to beplaced ia different seoious (called ahnika, pada, adhyeya,etc.) is conoerned.l Since ancient teachers do not seem tohave followed the modern idca of proportion, no legitrmateconclusion oan be drawn on the basis of the extent of thechapters.

The second argument pointing to a change in style doesnot berr any illustration. It is even not clear as to whatsort of change in style is meant by the critic. We areunable to find any appreciable change either in the gramma-tical characrer of words ( Paninian or otherwise ) or in theuse of particular words,

The third argumenr sbowing repetition ( punaruktt \ hashardly anv force. The critio has quoted five srrtras (4.30-34)to show repetition or redundancy. These strt,ras speak of

l. One or two exarnples would suffice. In the Visqudharma-sfitrr there are a few chapters in which the number ofthe sttras is less than ti, while there are ohapters thatconiain sirtras more rhrn 40. Similarly in the C. On. S.there are chaprers rhat contain 14 0r 15 srrtras whilein some chapters the number of strtras is more tban 65.

38,. An Introduction to the Yogastrtra

thc cessation of affiiction and actions ( +.f O ), inf,nitude of

jidnal 4.31 ), oessation of the sequence of the mutalions

( of the gunas ) (4,32 ), definition of sequencc ( 4.33 )and the Dature of kaivalya ( +.:+ ). A careful reading of

tbe'Ys. would show that the themes of the sntras 4.31'33

have not been touched in the srttras of the second chapter.

Sinoe there is mention of kaivalyain 2,25 one may take

sir. 4.34 as an example of repetition. Tradirionally speak'

ing,. srr 4.34 oannot be taken to be an example of repetition'

for these two strtras treat of kai,alya from different perspec'

tives-a fact wbich may be easily understood by examiningtl'e nature of these two stltras ( cp. "ql lA F4Iq: +flaqFaiTsqqeTcrqls gr€RT] rI{Fd, every argument ceases to be amefe repetitio.-n if it bears sorne little distinction, Sankarao n B r U p . 2 . 1 . I S ) .

The fourth argument has hardly any force. Since 'the

sense'of a more relevant manner' has no fixed character,the 'sense of relevancy differs according to the cbange inradition or in mental copseption. Whether the topics inthe fourth chapter could have been dealt with in a morerelevant manner with simil"r discusstons in the first threechapter is a matter that can be judged cnly by those whoare aocustomed to think strictly in accordance with theprinciples of li lerary composition aocepted in ancient times.\['e may furtber add that works composed by at;cientteachers were highly suitable to those who were trained incomprehending the rignificance of the statements of theirrcachers with the help of the knowledge of tbe affangefientof topics. It is needless to say that this arrangement wasdone in accordance with some well-established principles.A knowledge of these principles of arranging sections( p'akarcpas ) is indispensable f.'r o^tpttbending the natureof the categories and the inports of words as well.

Though the critic has not given any example to provehis asserdon yet he seems to think that the strtras on karman,va-sr,'d and sathskdra (A 7 fi.) should have been read eitl:erin tne seorion on karmaiaya ( 2.12 ff. ) or in the scction

Ic the fourth pada a subsequent addirion ? 39

on kleia (2.3 tr ). He is wrong. There is a olear differenco of

purpose ig dcaling with karmans in two different places ( in

the second and fourth chaptero ) and it is this difference

which compelled Patarjali to placo the sEtras on karman in.

two differrent padas.

The fifth argument that the fourth cbapter has a tenden*

cy to criticize the views held by the Buddhists, is untenabler,

for there is no real sign of such criticism (i. e., refutation of

views known to be held by the Buddha or the Buddhists). The

doubts or the wrong views dispelled or refuted in the stttras'

are srrch as arise naturally from the yogic views establishedin the strtras, That is why it is not reasonable to hold thatthb doubts shown in the YS. belonged to some anti-yogioschools. Ancient teachers are often found to compose sut'ra$.for dispelling natural doubts with a view to making theirdisciples capable of oomprehending the views established bythem in a better way (cp. the maxim of tcqf{qat-the maximof fixing a post deeply). Even if these doubts or prima facieviews are found to hrve been propounded by some pre-Pata-'irjalian terchers of non-yogic schools, yet it would be worng,to hold thlt Patafrjali must have oome to know of th;se viewsfrom these nor-yogic souroes. The exp ess refutation of thedoribts (prila facie view) in only two or threc places positi-vely shows tbat the author of the YS. had no intention ofrefuting the views of anti-Yogic schools.

The rnere existence of some of tht views (refuted byPatafljali) it the Buddhistic works crnnot be taken as suggest-ing the faot that these views were at first held by the Buddlt-ist teachers and that Patanjali came to know of them from

the Buddhistic sources, for there is no such indications inthe slras as point to the non'Yogic sources of these doubts.Moreover it caonot b: shown convincingly tbat the express-

ions used in the elevent sttras in thc fourth pada express

those philosophical views that are peculiar to the Buddhist

tesohers. There is no word io this p'ada that can reasonablybe taken to be of Buddhistia origin.

As regards the sixth argunert that tbe nature of treat-

40 An Introduction to the Yogasrttra

ment in thc first threo chapters is differenr from the treatment

in the fourth chapter inasmuch as in the former group the

doctrines of yoga have been propounded, wbile in the latrer

the views of rhe opponents (i. e., the'Buddhists) have been

criticized, it is to be noted that this 'differenoe in the nature

of treatment' oan hardly prove that the fourth pz'da is a later

addiiion, This nodon of difference is also not beyond legiti-

ruate doubt. Even if it is accepted that the fieatment is differ-'ent, it may be considered that Patanjali thought it more

fruirful to discuss 'the views of the opponents' in the lasr

chaprer taking it to be the concluding part (upasamha'a pdaa)

of his work. The peculial character of the last (i. e.' the

fourth) chapter may thus be taken to be a sign of ekakarrr-

kuwa (rhe siare of being composed by one author) of tle Vf '

(TVe however find tro reason to believe that in the fourth

ihupt.. patanjali criticized the views wbich were originally

held by anti-Patafljala schools).

It is the seventh argumenr rhat seems to have some weight'

3ut on a proper ccnsideration il would appear thar the

word iti oannot be taken as tbe last word of the last srrtra of

the tbird chapter and that the remarks Rfla: gawtcol drd not

originally belong to the commentary. It may be easily uncler-

rtooO tU"t had Vz.caspad fead tbe word iti in the $trtra 3.55,

he would have stated Efu: wssqt.ol (iti indioating the end of

the pada) and not efla: gavuiwl, for no useful purpose is served

Uy saying that iti indicates the end of tbe srrtrr 3.55. If

vacasiati took tbe word iti in tbe strtra 3.5 5 as indicatiog the

end of the Yogasntra itself, he must have afforded some

reason for comrnenting on the fourth chapter, tbr according to

hi n, it was not the genuine part of the YS' Vacaspart's

remarkson the word fli in the last strtra of thefourth chapter(qt{ qfld{rae: sll€sqrfrl) are however jnstified and they are in

accordance with 'the principle of literary composirion' of

ar cient India.The foregoing discussion shows that the remarks sflo: q1-

sq6] were originally absent in T. Vai. It is reasonable to

hold that the aforesaid statement is due to the inadvertence

of tbe scribe.

Is the fourth p6da a subsequent addition t qt

It is to be noted in passing that in the Tattvavai(aradiv6caspati did not uso ifi while referring to the srrtras exceprin those oases where the porrion of a srrtra is quoted wirha view to rcferring to the whole sritra ( in all such cases itiis to be taken in the sense of ,this'; ity'flli meating rhavingtbese words at the beginning, ). The printed ."iaiog oiitt with the silt,'a-pratikat in four or five praees onty ii thewhole body of the Tattvavai(rrad, ( in severar editions )evidently seems to be due to the ig'orance or inadvertenceof the editors. Tbat Vaca-spati was not accustomed to useiti after the su-tta-pratikas may be known from hisTaparyatika also.

As to how th€ useless remark {lo: qaaete} came intoexistence, ve afford the folrowing explanation. Simirar senten-ces are found in the Tatparyat,,ka. of Vacaspati : {la: gascrs}( t . t . I and l . t 3last l ines ) , r fo: gaaurir Sqqfh.( . i . i . ' ;last line ). As ttre Nyayasrrtras themsiives do iiot conrain theword ili, the expression s[ftra-sama-pfi must be hken to meanth: :.id

of.gztef or-( to be rrlore explicir ) galwffevqfqsi{( oelrberatton on tbe categories mentioned in the srrtia ),{t is clear that ev:n this meaning of qFtr szgqrs} i, ;J;applicable to the case in quesrion. Mosr probaUty qFd: gz_gcrgl is an imitltion of the Tatparyat ka *.oi.oo., q-u,*l"yo abcye ) which was put in the margin of the MS.of the T. Vai. by somebody and which was copied by latcrscribeg.2

Following points are ro be noted in this connection.Bhiksu says rhat the word iri in 3.55 is found in a fewmanuscriprs ( +<fafl<flanaq: sar;+ laeFd ) and remarks thatit indicates the end of tha topic 6ralwi+agq. Futility of thisremark can be uoderstood easily, for iti is not found to havebeen used for indicating the end of simirar other topics in

l. i, ""o*i

n"*r""t ""

,o..i..4 that Vi.caspati originallywrote gfil: grEqrTI.Tl, whioh was corruptly written by alater sribe as qfla: iFtqqlEd), for no suoh remarks haveb'en given by Vrcaspati while commenting on the lastsirtra$ of the first and second padas.

1\ r An Introductton to the Yogastrtra '

the YS. ( Uhikqu does not read i'i at the end of the first two

ohaptors; while referring to iti in the last strlra of ths YS.

he rcmarks qfrqrE: wqTewftageatsi:. It is important to note

that no direct commentaries on the YS., namely Rajamarmqdan

Yogama{riprabbd, eto. read the word iri as the last word of

rhc $otra 3.55.8

The eigbth argument is pur ely subjeotive. Unless it is

demonstrated that there was weakness in Patanjali's exposi'

tion of tbe Yoga views it is quite unreasonable to assume'

that the fourtb cbapter was composed by a person in a later

period with a view to strengtheniog the Yoga position' The

weakness in the argument will be clearly discernible if the

critic takes the trouble to reply the following questions :

( I ) Can it be proved beyond doubt that the fourtir chapter

was written after the advanced works on Buddhist metaphy-

sics had been composed ? (2) Was the.e really any view in

Buddhist metaphysics which was so foroeful that yogins took it

as worth considering io their philosophical treatises ? We, how-

ever, ere of the opinion that even the bighly advanced Bud-

dhisi metaphyics has very little to do with a proper philoso-

phical analysis of c'fta eta, and that tbe views propounded

in the early works on Buddhism seem to be so rudimentary

and vague that they can hardly be taken as possossing the

power of demolishing the views of tbe yogins.It should be noted

in passiog that there are a few stttras in the first three chap-

ters tbat cannot be explained if the relevant sirtfas in tne

fourth chapter are not read with them.

g. It islnoteworthy tbat in the Vivaraoa conmentary on the

Vyasabb:pya (which was not published when Dr' Dasgupta

composed his book) the last srrtra of each chapter ts read

witb iti, wbich indicates the end of the chapter. That iti

in the last srrtra of the fourth ohapter indicates the end

of the whole text is beYond doubt.

soME sulnes oF DouBTFUL AuTHoRsItrpAlmost all the commentators agree that the Yogastrtra

consiste of 195 strtras in its four chapters containing 51, 5555'and 34 s[tras respectively. There is however a differenoeof opinion regarding the genuineness of thc following foursrr t ras:

1.Te ptatiprasavaheydh sflcmap (2. 10);

2. Na ca tat sdlambanait tttsl'dt'isayibhitctvat (3,20);

3. Na ctt ikaci t tatant idrh.. . . . . . . . . . .s.vat ( a. l 6 ) ;4. Etena iabdadyantardhdnah veditavyam ( read by ooly

one commetrtator after the srrtra 3.22).( t) l ,et us consider the f i rsr example ( YS. 2.10 ). This

is a srrtra according to Bhoja, Bhavrpal.e(a, tbe Mar.riprabha,,Candrika and the Yogasudhakara. Na,goji or Nage6a in hissbort commentary ( published in K. S. Series, no. 83 )remarks tbat according to Vacaspati this is not a stttra but astatement of the Bheqya ( Te pnti...,....... iti tu bhaqyam evana su-ttam iti Va-caspatisvatasall /t. Pt. Srindlaya+a Mi(raalso thinks that this is not a siltra accordiog to Vao.,spati(vide his remarks on p. 471 in bis edition of the Vyasabhaqyawith two commentaries; published by the Bharatiya VidyaPrakasan ).

We however take the remarks of Na.geSa as faulty, for.thesimple reason that Patafljali has himself alluded to this andthe following sirtra in the fourth chapter, yide sft|,ra 4.28 inwhich the expression kleJa,-at refers to the two previously readstrtras, v iz. 2. lO and 2. l l (Vir leYoga{art t ika on 4.Lg).Thus it is beyond doubt that rhe sirtra 2.10 belongsto tbe YS.

1. ,lt is noteworthy that a remark toin the Chaya comm. by Nagoji onrhan this commenrry.

this effect is not foundYS., which is lorger

Au Introduction to tbc Yogastrra

We are of the opinion that Nage{a has failed in under-

standing the significance of the statement of Vacaspati (+wrq

g;T: c5sft qlslls.cqr""""q.eqr q q{;FriuT sfqdT, 2.10). Nage$a

takes this statement to mean that 'a sflrra on the strkqma

sratp of the kledas was not oomposed by the author of,the

sttras ( i. e. Patafljali )'. He is wrong. In fact Vacaspati here

puts a question as to "while the four states of the klegas

have been expressly stated in the strtra 2.4, how is it that

the fifth ( i. e. strkqma ) state of the kle6as, which is said

to be of the nature of burnt seed (i. e. having no power toproduce results in the future.), has not been stated in tbatvery strtra !" Va,caspatr himself replies to tbis question bystating that "since the strtra 2.4 speaks crf only tlrose statesof kledas that are within the scope of the exertions of man( Prayatnagocara ) and since rhe fifih state of the kleSls isnot within the scope of a man's exertion, Patanjali did notmention the fifth state in sft. 2.4" ( qq flte g{qsqffirrtS{T{g-Fcsqi t q q €qrtqeTqr;i xarariar: ).'

It is remarkable to ' note that Ra,ghavananda irt hisP:tanjalarahasya says nothing on the remarks of Vt',caspati.Had Rzrghavananda understood tbese remarks as indicarivsof the absence of the sirra 2.10 he would have said some-thing on such an important textual criticism while oomment-ing on str. '2.10. Pt. Balarama is also silent on this point,he seems to have understood the meaning of the remarks ofVacaspati as we take them to mean.

2. This shows that ancient authors ( sutrakaras ) followedcertain principles in nol mentioning an entity ( in asf,tra ) which requires to be rnentioned. Lack of theknowledge of these principles may give rise to highlyerroneous views. For example one may rhink that sinceGotama mentioned duhkha and not sukha in the s0traon the ptameyds ( NS. 1.1.9 ) he did not regard sukhaas an entity, Non'mention of sukha in the above sotrasimply meanE tbat sukha was not regarded as t Fameyoin the technical sense of the term.

44

45 Som€ $ritras of doubtful auihorship

(2) Let us consider the seoond example ( yS. 3.20, racd tot"" ""). Aooording to Bhikqu, his disciple Bhavegane$a,

and NageSr (who seems to follow the views of these twoaornmentators) the sentence belongs to the Bha;ya, whileaccording to Vacaspati, Bhoja, Remanandayati and theauthor of the Vivarala, it is a strtras. Though there is noillogicality in taking the sentence as a sQtra since ir removesa doubr tbat arises naturally frorn the view established intheproceding srrrra ser{TfzT c{Fs(f,rq{ (i.e.YS.3.l9) yet it scems robe natural to take the sentence as belonging to the Vyasabh.apya, for io this chapter containing 55 sfttras tbero is noother sittra that attempts ( even slightly ) to refute anyview. As one of the chief functions of a bhaqya is tocriticize others' viewsa it seems ro be logical to tako thisstatementr as belonging to the VyasabhaSya. It is howeverneedless to say that even if this statement do€s not belong tothe JsgnsLtra the view propounded in it is ia perfectconsonance with tho fundamental dootrines of theYS. concerning the relationsbip that exists betweet citta,pr^tyaya and Elambsna.

So far as the doctrine itself is concerned, it makes nodifference whether rhe statement belongs to the YS. or theVB. In fact the authorship of tbe sentence belongs to the fieldof literary composition and as such 'it should be decidedwith the help of manuscript evidence.

3. Whether T. Vai. takes the sentence .d s dd.....as a srrtraor as a bhZqya passage is not however quite olear.T'he Vivararla is also nor clear on tbis point. Since theway of explaining the strrras does not dif{er from the wayof explaining the bhasya passages ir becomes sometimeshighly difficult to deter:nine whether a sen;enoe explaio-ed by a commentator is a sirtra or a bhaEya passage.

+. :Bhagyu is usually defined as .ql*qtqt€{Flct 6q;' (pada-mafl jar i , p. 4.)

An Introduotion to'the Yogasrrtra '46

, It.appears that Patanjali wbs not interested in reiltation

and thdi his chief purpose was to propound tbe viewsl'only.

This'may be proved by tbe fact tbar in the YS. there aie aifev

sutras that could have expressed the views with much force

had they been composed with the words E s. Take the srrtra

orurqcrfu srftt*frcaeaq (4.10). Had it been oonposed as.? if iilwqlfEeq{ qr&rs} fEq€T( it would have expressed the

vien, of the beginninglessness of vdsans-s more forcefully.', As to why the strtra iT dE tsrqld Fq€rE (4.19) was not

formed asir( aTF{rrTni Ewoq it may be replied that here the,f,orm of the prima facie view (namely ctbe citta is svdbhdsa')

was $o well known that Patarjali thought it useful to compos€

rbe strtra 4.19 in the aforesaid form. It must be accepted

that in some cases the dispclling of prima facie views becomes

more effeodve than the propou'rding of the established views.

(3) Ler us consider the third example, namely the s6tra

4.16 (na caikacitta..../ beginning with the expression na ca.

Bhikq.u takes it to be a sutra (rat a prutyuttaram sitram idam\,

wbile some of the authors of rhe direct commentaries on the

YS. regard it as a bhaqya sentence. According to us it is morelogical ro take the sentenca as not belongiog to the YS, forthe following strtra 'tadupardgd....' (4.17; is so intimatelyconnected wilh the strra 'vostus-anye....' (4.15) thar therehardly arises any oocasion to refute a doubt thowever natu-ral it might be) between these two srrtras. We may reiteratethat cven if this sotra does not belong to the YS. the viewwhich is established in it by refuting the opposite view mustbe taken as known to the author of the YS There is howevcrno logioal fault in bolding that the view refuted berc was knownto some pre-Patafljalian teachers of non-yogic scbools also,

(a) The sentence (etena iabdd....'(4th example) read as astrra in the Candrika commentary after the strtra 'kdyatfipa,.,,'

(3.21) is, in fact, rhe last senrence of rhe Bbaqya on sa.3.2l'This sentenoe embodies the view whiob rs a corollary (i, e,, a.

47 Some sotras of doubtful authorship

conclusion derived through afih7pnti) of the doctrine estab-

lished in sir. 3'21. Such corollaries are, as a rule, not stated

in thc strtras as has been clearly stated by Vacaspati ( tfq

aTqtFsrEd- qafiT{I <nilFe, Tatparyatika l. l. 2 ). Th"t this

sentence belongs to tbe Bhasya was known to most of the

€ommentators also ( vide the comm. by Bhoja, Ramananda-

yati and Bhiksu ).We find a spurious sut(a, namely kqcrcdstq{: read

in the Chow. ed of tbe Yogasfitra ( Kashi Sanskrit Seriep;83 )

afrer the strtra 3.22 ( p. 139). The editor Pt. Dhugdhirzja

Sirstrin acceprs the sentence as a strtra (qE gaq{srfssi TtrA).An explanation of the stttra is given here also. Tbe sentenoe

with the explanation is read in such a place in the aforesaid

editron that one may take the commentator Nage3a as accept-

ing this sentence as a sttra. But this is hardly correot, for

Nage5a in his Chaya commentary ( published in the Bombay

Sanskrit and Prakrit Series, No. XLVI ) is totally silent on

.this sentence. It is quite likely rhat the sentence is a fragmeut

of the Yogavarttika passage 'er;ql;qfq fefs{rrqRuatlq sf€s6-

qTqfiG.tTRfqeqafc ftqqrcieffirfEsr6i:t, taken out from the

passage in a corrupt form and that somebody, taking the

sontence to be a s[tra, explained it. The sentence ( with

its explanation ), presumably occurring in the margin of a

MS., was copied by some inadvertent scribe taking to be a

genuine sntra belonging to the Yogastrtra.

2ANoMALous pLAcrNc oF soME silrnes

Some of the srrtras in the YS. seem to havc been readin improper plaoes. A few examples of suoh irregular oranomalous placing are going to be discussed here.

( t) fne str tra f l fow( i l s 'dq ( : . f : )seems to be anexample of the aforesaid kind. Prittbha is that jRana whioharises just before the rise of prasamkhyina and is caused byptatibhA, also known as film ( self-cogitation

'i. As it is

intimately conneoted with vivekaja jndna this sr-ltra sbouldhave been placed just before or after the sirtra 3.54 whichdescribes vivekaja ihana. Moreover this sirtra does notspeak of any suhyama ( as is suggested by the use of thefifth case-ending in the word prdtibha ) and as such it ishigbly illogical to place it with those srrtras thar enioinstuityana.

It appears that the sutra 3.33 is read in this place witha view to indicating the fact that all the supernormal powers

desoribed in the preceding satras (i.e. sntras from 3.16 to3.3 2)can be acquired through prdtibha only withour applying rhesathaymas as stated in the relevant sirtras. The word sarvo in3.33 means not all the siddhis known to yogins but 'all that arestated in tho preceeding srrtras.r Since citta-sa,itvid (1.141 can

1. In (asuic language the word {zi in 3.33 is c5dr1rFcq andnot fq:frqilqq1 ( vide Sitiraka-bhasya 2.4.6: Taitva-vai$aradi 3,52); in other words it is qfqtrarts ( Sabara-bhdsya 1.2.16 )-'311 rhar are already given, shred orknown.' For the use of tho word wf in the sense ofqfifq+ uafrtat, see Medhdtithi's comment on the wordsarva in Manu 11.239.

;

1r

4 Anomalous placing of some sfitras +9

not he acquired through the prdtibha jfr,dna, it is plac"ed atier

the sf. 3.33. The same pr-atibha si'ddhi has been stated ins'-rtra 3.36 in order to indicate that it is one of the results of

sodrtha sait2ama.

(2) The placing of the sltras 3.9-15 apparently seems tobe anomelous. It may be urged that as these sltras deal withpari4.d,n:a ( mutation and their va-rieties and as pariryd,na belongsto a dharnin ( substra-tum ) it is quite logicnl to read them withthe siitras 4.12-16 which deal with substratum ( vastu i.e.dharmin ).

ft appears that since a knowledge of mutation is highlynecessarv for comprthending the nature of the supernormalpfwers, which a"re the natura-l results of yoga practice, patafrjalithought it extremely useful to read the siltras on paripamabe-fore reading the sLitras on the supernormal porvers, thorrghlogically it is proper to place these srrrr.s in the 4th pada whichdeals with uasfa. since the YS. chiefly dears with the practiceof yoga, it often takes into corlside'ation a themc in such a wayas lvould be more useful to the practitioners.

(3) while discussing supernormal powers i' the third chapterof his work Patafljali rercl the sltra on the power knownas the 'knowledge of the p:rst and tl.re future', in the first prace( 3.16 ). Some may raise an objection to the placing oi ttr issiltra since this power is neither the highest nor the lowest ofthe si.ddhis.

The reason for mentioning the power of auta-.(rnAg(rta_jftana in the first place seems to be its high importance. To beexplicit; this power is the proof for establishing the doctrineof satkdrTa which governs the whole field of origination anddestruction ofthe evolutes. Yogins aver that the rise of the know_ledge of the past and the future is a conclusive evidence provingthat an effect exists in its materiar cause in a subtre form ( aitSafrkarac.rya's bh.gya on Br. Up. l. 2. t 1.2

2. c]ftrri srfliliTrrr(ilrir€q sciETq I air?g uf{saq vz:,

50 An lntmduction to tbe Yogasirtra

(*) .dpparently it appears that the placing of the s-utra on

antmdhwa ( invisibility ) ( 3,21 ) is irregular, for it has been

placed between the siddhis called paracittaifiana ( knowledge of

the mind of another) ( 3.19-20 ) and aparantajftana ( knowledge

of death ) ( 3.22 )-both of which are of the nature of jir'ano'

Traditional scholars are of the opinion that there is no anomaly

in the placing of this siltra. Since antardhd,na belongs to the field

of perception it was treated alcng with the powers of the nature

of cognition (jftdnarapa siddhi ).

(5) T'he placing of the siltra ( 3.31 ) oo sthairla ( motion'

lessness ) among the si'ddhis of the nature of jfr'ana seems to be

anomalous. That this sthairla is physical is beyond dcubt' It

appears that by placing this siltra in the section on jl'dna-tit$d

sirtdhi Patarjali wanted to indicate that here physical motion-

lessness is to be taken as a sign of mental calmness' It should

also be noted that as the technique of bringing about physical

motionlessness ( 3.31 ) and the cessation of hunger and thirst

mentioned in the preceding sitra ( 3.30 )are bastd on kaya2itha'

jV.dnastared in sfr. 3.29, the sltras 30-31 are placed after the

siltra 3,29, though the aforesaid calmness and cessation are

not ofthe nature ofjftana.

(6) It is usually held that the sltra e sflel gc€fliageqrl-

fsaq: ( 3.37 ) deserves to be read either at the beginning or at

the end of the discussion on siddhis as it propounds the view

showing the general character of all the siddhis, On a close

study of the sutra it appears that the sirtra has a particular

trar ufeulq-seisqqm ceqqi flI;T fqgqr tqrq ( Sairkara on

Bt-tp. I.2. 1 )-"The knowledge of yogins of the past and

future jars is infallible. Had the future jar been non-

existent, perceptual cognition of it found in persons possessing

lordly powers would prove to be false." tqq(: = of an

i3vara; here i*vara refers to a person possessing siddhis, also

cal led t rad; cp. BI-uP. 1.4.8 for a s imi lar sense of the

word {qsr.

Anomalous placing of some sijtras 5 I

:purpose and that to fulfil that purpose it is required to be readin the place where saityama concerning puru;ajfi,ana has beendiscussed.

If we read the siitra 3.97 with 3.36 which says thar at thetime of prectising safityama on the pauru;e2a_proQta1a therc-frequ:ntly arise six powers before the rise of puru;a-j,il,ano kno*oas prdtibha, ir'auarya. etc. the purpose of siitra 3.37 becomes clear.Tlre su-tra means to say that thoulh the sath2ama on ihePaurusela-prctta)0, at first gives rise to prAtibha etc. (tli ,sepowers arise without any volit ion of the yogin) yet they act as'obrtacles to the purpose of the safi)dmo itself, i. e. these powersare impediments to the puruqa_jfrdna. The word samddhi in this

' silt:"a evidently stands f or pawrt';e1a sathlana. A similar use of theword samldhi is found in the Bhlsya passage g{rfqqr: tSAq)-4T€zIril:(4.1) where the rvord samadhi obviously means sathyama.

( 7 ) ln the last part of the third chapter are found the twosilrras, namely (q61{rrqraft E}qftqeT} *e.+q ( 3.50 ) and sr?.!awd: TFasw* *qeqq ( : .s i ; , both of which speak of rhemanifestation of kai.aallta ( isolation ). A question m.y be raisedabout the relevance of lbrming two sirtras on the same pheno-menon (i, e. the manifestation of kaiual2a) in two different places

' of the sa me chapter. It may be further asked : Does there o.ir" u.rufault if the sE.i-55 is read just after the sr. 3 50 in the form ofgtrqtqq):

{lavr.a q ?I t appears that these two siitras treat of isolation in two distinct

ways and this is why one cannot serve the pufpose of the other.while the siltra 3-5c shows the factors to be avoided in orderto attain isolation, the stitra 3.55 speaks o[ the condition whichimmediately leads to isolation. The reading of the sltra 3.55after the siitra on aiaekaja_jl,ana $.54) seems to indicate thatiuddhi,-sa,n1a arises after the attainment of uioekaja_jft,ana.

(B) A question may be raised about the reason for readingtwo strtras on bala (mental and bodily strength) (3.23_24)betweeithe sitras on a par ail ajilena (3,22) and stk Sia-uryaa ahita-oi pr ak r sta-j f tana (325) . Acogenr reason forreadingsI .3,2S_2i in rheaf oresaid place is difficult to find.

Ei'

ISITJUSTIFIED TO HOLD THATTHE YOGASUTR'q ' '

IS A \YORK OF \'IULTIPLE AUTHORSHIP ?'

Some modern scholars are lound to maintain ths view

that the Yogasiltra is of multiple authorship i' e' different parts'

oIthis text were composed by different pefsons; some even hold

that all of these persons were not of one mind'

Before attempting to examine the validity of these viervs we

want to sav something ot'o"t the nature of authorship and the

technique of .om'otition' It must be admitted that the idea

of 'authorship' and of 'the technique of composition' varies from

time to time ancl that it would be basically wrong to ascribe

a later idea of authorship and the technique of composition to'

the field of literary tompo'ition of earlier period' Similatly

the idea of interpolation' also r'aries from time to time'

We are of the opinion that the word authorship in connection

with tlre works like 't'u Vogut;tra is to be taken in a restricted'

sense. Tbe Yogasutra is not similar to a new composition'

of a poet' nor does it firll under those works that contain origi'

nality of their authors' lt is an n'clmitled fact that a large part

of the siltras are '^t"t Ot Patanjali from the works of his

predecessors "i't'u' *'u'i^ti"t o' with slight changes ( in order

to suit the character of his new composition )' It is also

reasonable to hold that Patafrjali gave new illustrations' etc' to

render his composition more suitable to the aspirants to yoga

in his times and that he presented' the traditional views in such

a waY that the t;i;"";t b:T-u able- to comprehend them

easily. Since persons of different ages catrnot be properly

taught through "t"'-""U the same form of presentation' there

arise change' i" 'tt" ""t-of

p'"*ntiog traditiona! views according

10 the Ghanges of time'

Is the Yogasirtra a work of multiple authorship ? 53

Since the ancient authors, whose statements were incorpo''rated bv Pataii jali in lr is composition, were of one mind (i. e.,' they were tne followers of the same line of t lroueht), the.composition of the Yogasr-rtla may be taken as an example of'multiple authorship'.

We firmly holc thrt t 'nere is notl i ing that positively

sholvs that the nerv 'composition' ot'the YS. rt 'as done by more

than one person. It is ho'"vever nor unlikely that one or t\{o

siltras were incorporated in the body ol the YS. afterwards by

some persons belonging to the tradition of Patafl jali with a view

to elabcrating the views of the author. Such an act of in-'corpTating sentences must be regarded as a commonly accepted

custom prevalent in ancirrnt Indi:1. This custom is in conso-

nance with the nature of praoacana or teaching { Such

incorporated sentences may be regarded as interpolations if

considered historicallv ). In the tradition these interpolations

are accepted as possessing the same authoritativenes as the

statements of the original teachers for two reasons: first these:;interpolaled sentences are strictly based on the oral teachings

,of the original teachers and secondly these sentences render

aubstantial help io the students of later ages in comprehending,.the views of the original authors more deeply and correctly.

Now we are going to show the futility of the arguments

advanced by modern scholars to prove that the YS. was composed'by persons of different minds. Max Mtiller seems to be the'first person who raised the question of the aforesaid kind of

authorship by advancing two arguments. IJis first argumeut-runs thus : "One sometimes doubts whether all the sitras can

really be the work of one and the same mind. Thus while in-the course of Patafljali's speculation, we could not but give himcredit for never trying to locate the mind or the act of percei-

ving and .conceiving in the brain, or in something like the,pinea'l gland, we find him suddenly in 3.34, claiming the muscle..of the heart:as the seat of the consciousness of thought (Hydayc,,*itta-sathaidf' ( S. S. L P. pp. 466-67 ).

54 An Introduction to the Yogasutra

In the example given above there is nothing tliat can '

even faintly show that the sfitras ane not the work of one andr

the same mind. Patafljali's silence about the location of the-

mind etc. ( in the sitrasin the first Ghapter ) simply shows'

that he did not think it necessary to speak o[ it in that place"-

Ancient teachers had well-established principles of dealing with'

the topics in a literary composition. According to these princi'

ples it is not necessary to state the location of the ci"a while

dealing with the uytti's of tbe ci,tta and similar other functions'

The second argument put forward by Max Miiller is

as fcllows : ''While the human body as such is always regarded

as dark and as unclean so that the yogin shrinks from contactr

with his own, much more from contact with other bodies, we

are suddenly told ( 3.46 ) that by the satitlama or restraint'

colour, loveliness, strength and adamentine firmness may be-

gained for the body" ( S. S. I. P'p. 467 ).

We may inform our readers that according to yogic

tradition there is no contradiction in the two views shown above-

and as such the question of multiple authorship does not arise -

at all. The rise of strength etc. is a rratural result of yoga-

practice and as such its mention in the YS. is quite natural in

the section on supernorlnal powers. The acquirement of bodily

colour, etc. is in no way against the aiuci-bhauozZ ( vividly descri'

bed in Vydsabhdsya 2.5 ) concerning the body, and the bhaaana

may also be directed to the bodily perfections stated inYS''

3.45. It is quite i l logical to think that since colour (rapa) ot'

Ioveliness (laua.1,a) of the body is not one of the desired things

of yogins, its natural manifestation (which is the result of a"

part;cular kind of yoga practice ) does not deserve to be stated

in a treatise on yoga. The rise of rtlpa etc' ( as stated in 3.46 )

is not necessarily an obstacle to higher yoga Practice, though

it may cause downfall to such practitioners as are not properly

trained ln the science of Yoga.

T'he third argument of mcdern scholars says that as super-

normal powers 61s ussless and hindrarnes for an aspirant Ofl

Is the Yogasiltra a work,of'multiph alrthorship ? 5$.

isolation, Patafljali cannot devote a whole chapter on the sqper-rlcrrmal powers.

We, on the contrary. hold that it was necessary ,for

Patafljali to compose a large number of siitras on the super-

normal powers as they indicate the following facts :

( i J These supernormal powers point to the existence of

a subtle world behind the gross world; ( ii ) the rise of supernor-mal powers convinces a practitioner that he is running on thepath of yoga in a proper way; (iii) a large number of philoso.

phical doctrines may be deduced from these powers.

'It should be noted in this connectionthat thesepowe'$"

are not natural obstacles to isolation. It is the misuse of thesepowers or the blind attachment to these powers which causesdownfall to a practition* r. Moreover yogins of only a p.lrticular.kind may attain isolation without acquiring these powers..

For others the acquirement of these powers is a natural fact.It should also be borne in mind that yoga practitioners aregreatly helped by these powers. for they may use them to get ridof those circumstances that stand as obstacles to yogr.l practice.

We may further add that the rise of the supernormal

powers is so natural that no autbor dealing with yoga practiceean dispense with them. It would be a fault on the part of anauthor of a treatise on yoga practice to remain silent about thesepowersr for his silence may create the wronq notion that thesepowerc are not the natural results o[ yoga prrctice. That iswhy every treatise dealing with the ahgas of yoga invariablyspeaks of these powers.

Some of the modern scholars are found to hold that, thefirst chapter of the YS. rnay have originally formed a book,complete in itself. Max Miiller also held this view ( S. S"1. P. p. 455 ).

Let us take this unfounded assertion as valid. Now if rryeassume that (the rest of the text ( i. e. 2-4 pedas ) was corrposedby the followers of the Patafljala school by following the oral.

-56 An Introduction to the Yogasirtra

staternents of Pataijali, given at the time of teaching" the said

rernarks loose their force totally so far as the nature of 2oga'

oid2a is concerned, for had Fataljali cornposed the rest of the

book, he would have also composed sltras stating the views

propounded in the last three ch"pters' Unless it is shown that

the doctrines stated in the second, thir<i arrd fourth chapters are

not in consonance with the views propoulded in the 6rst chapter

it is phitosophically meaningless to hcld tlrat the last three

chapters are not composed by the author of the first chapter'

As a large number of ,ilt'u' in the last three chapters deal with

those entities that are mentioned by narne only in the first

chapter (namely kle3a, karman, vip:rka' h: aya i' e' v6 anI' sarbsk[ra

etc. ), there is no illogioitity in holcling thatthe author of the

'first chapter.o-po,"J the last three chapters also unless the

opposite view is proved by independent reasons'

Philosophically it is quite baseless to hold that "the sltras

on iivara (1.2g'27 ) are unconnected with the other parts of

the book as they contradict the foundations of the system"

( Garbe: The Philosophy of Anci-eltIndia' p 15 )' for the nature

)na'trrr",iorrs of i3vara of the Yogasiltra are in perfect 'onso'

aance with the nature of the purusa principle and the three

noour. According to the Yosa philo"ophy God is an assemblage

i"iiirnuitl of purusa and prahrti' ( r.o be explicit : the

)"r".tt, liberated divine citts is a modificatiorr of tbe gunas and

ii, itruminated by the immutable purusa principle') This concep'

,* "t lsvara is b:sically different from the prpular concep'

ti*, oi God as found in various systems' Tbe views about

tUou.o o, stated in the YS' ( and the bhasya thereon ) are the

,corollaries of the principal doctrines of SiLirkhya'

I n c o n c l u s i o n w e w a n t t o a s s e r t ' t h a t t h e e x i s t . n c e o f.composite works in Sanskrit isnot deniedby us' The extant

texts of the Purdqas are the glaring examples of such works'

That the extant Pur6pic texts are of multiple authorship

'*uy 6u convincingly proved by some cogent reasons' A Purl:ra

,**i i, a collection of some dialogues ( saiaddas ) on subjects

Is the Yogasitra a work of multiple authorship ? 57

'of different kinds. No logical connection invariably exists in

'the order of these dialogues. Moreover most of these dialogues

appear to have been originally composed as independent works,

which came to be incorporated in a ?urI',ra in different times

with necessary changes in order to suit the purpose of the author

whose business was to satisfy the need o[ his readers having

varying capacity and belonging to different sects. Tbe nature

of the subjects in a Purdga also points to the multiple authorship'

A Purdna mentions such historical factors as belong to different

periods of t ime. It may be easily observed that certain passxges

of a Puilpa propound contradictory views. There are verses in

one and the same Purdna that praise as well as blame the same

religion or deity. The treatment of the topics in a Purrpic work

sometimes clearly shows that it was composed by many hands'

Even judging from linguistic point of view a Purara text cannot"be taken as eomposed by one and the same hand. Noneof

{hese, characteristics is found in the YogasEtra.

E

$;A NOTE ON THE SOTRAS IN TI{E YOGASUTRA-.

The sentences in the Yogaslfra are of the nature of sdtra,

rhe characteristics of which have been clearly stated in ancientworks.l On account of being composed in "the s[tra style thesesentences are required to be explained with the help ofcertain'rules called nylyas or paribhisas, As for example the sitra 1.7is to be explained according to the ny:iya ceid sl*qcfrsctFg:in order to relate the word pram6'a to each of tbe three factoE '

mentioned in the sfitra and not to the aggregate of the three. -On the contrary the sirtra 2.1 is to be explained with the help.of the nylya'qtEif qrEsqRgCTlg;, so that the word kriyEyoga

would refer to the aggregate of the three factors mentioned'in

this sir.tra.

Besides the assertive and prohibitive sr-rtras the Yogasiltracon'ains the following kinds of sr:*ras :

( i ) Siitras coining sarhjfids ( names ). The siitra on

sarhyama ( 3 4 ) is an example of this kind.2 A sarhjfie srrtra

restricts the meaning of the sarhjflE-word. The meaning of a

saLirjfra usually varies in different systems.

l. qeqrseqsfiqrq sFTq Faraa)1cq I

sf d?[SE"l fss: lr ( VaYu-P-59. 142).

ccmposed either in prose or in verse. It

that prose, verse and sitra are the three

composition.

2. The sense of sarhyama shown here is flRgrfC+. Since

it is not an artif icial ( a|sq ) rvord l iketT ( 1.1.20 ) fa

( 1.1.64 ). etc. of Penini, it must have a denoted sense

(areq qqi) also, which is eslafuig faaig sTfalftxtrs-

rFafufg qf{ qtqtsfqeaciaq' (Medhntithi on Manu 2.441-

cwJccqE?j q

A sEtra may be

is wrong to think

distinct styles of

A note on the sEtras in the Yogasiitra 59

( ii ) Sntras showing atidefu ( application by analogy ).Tlte s*tra 'Il:inam es:tvh klr*avad uktam' ( 428 ) is an 'apt

eilmple of this kind. Ati,deia is usually shown by using the

tecdndary suffix ucli. Sometimes atidela is shown by such

dOclarations as 'this may be explained by that'. The stttras

1.44 (etena . . . . uyak@aft )and 3 13 ( c tena. . . . . . ryakhlatah ) are

tLre examples of this kind.

( iii ) Srrrras that show oikalpa ( option ). The sirtra fJac'

rdPraqidhanad o-a (1.23 ) is the well-known example of oikalpa.We are of opinion that the means to wbich it is alternative is

the two-fold path of obhlVsq,-auirAgJa stated in strtra 1.12,3

( iv ) Strtras that sbow samucca)a ( combination ). Accor.ding to Vacaspati the sftra 1.33 is an example of thiskind,for rnaitri, etc. prescribed in this sitra are to be combined withall of the six means described in l. 34-39.

( v ) Siltras showing niyama ( restriction ). Usually a

niyama-sitra contains the word eoa ot tu. The siltra l.a6 (Taeoa, . ) is an example of this kind.Brcvitlt in thc sil.tras

The chief characteristic of a sfitra is its brevity ( tdgh.aaa \,Ttrat is why we find ancient teachers to declare that a sitra iscommendable if it cannot be reduced to a more concise

form ( cp. aia gi aq fin'lq'q q?qa t"I {TrclqqFo-

Mbh. Pradipa 7.4.47 ). This brevity is effected by notusing certain words that are required to make the intendedsense complete. The omission of the words required to co6- ,plete the intended sense is filled up bv two processes known asadklalesa ('speech-remainder' i. e. tbe part of a sentence whichis wanting and has to be supplied ) and anuoytti ( connectionof some words in a preceding sltra with the following sEtra ).a

3.Vi.dc my paper ,What is the means to which ,$vara,prani. -dhlna is an alternative'( Ludwick sternbach FelicitationVolume ).

4. For the nature arrd function of vdkyade;a the following.

60 An Introduction to the Yo gasiltra

Examples of vrkyas6;a are to be found in YS. 2,41,2.47,etcl in these places the verb forrns in finite tenses viz. bhaaanti,

bhaaati, etc. are taken as vakyasesas ( see the Bhasya ). It is

not the verbs meaning existence that are to be taken as the

examples ol udkltaie;a, but the verbs along with words signifying

particular states or conditions are also to be taken asarkyaieta. As

for example, the expressions (enud) i6k6q?t' r la|d in 2.4,1 ue

regarded z,s oak2aie;a of the sd. cq(qlifqoqr;Fu"q1qfflual{'

t 2.+l ) ( see Vivarar.ra ). The expressions sdsrfqal 'csfd

as given in the Bh':sya ( orr siltra 2.35 ) are also to be taken as

vdkyaSesa.

An example of anua'ytti, is found in s-u. 1,36 as is expressly

stated by the Bhrsya sgffrtic;;tT q;Ts: fecfqftq;qa-1t41?Tdfr.

All of these words in the Bha;ya occur in the preceding str. (l '35)

and they are to be connected not only with the sir. 1.36 but

also with the siltras 1.37-39 as is clearly stated in the Bhdsya.

The process of anuartti. is of various kinds.s As for exam'

ple in some siltras we find ekadela-anuaTtti The word tatra in

3.2 is an example of this process. It refers to de{a, a member.

of the compound word deia-bandha oithe precedingsrlua ( 3'l )."similarly the word tasya in 3.10 refers to the word cit la ( or'niruddhaksapd-citta

) which is a member of the compound word

nirud dha-k;apa-ct tt a-anaalta in 3. 9.

The Yogasir.tra contains examples of the apdkarSa form of

.anuaytti ( connection of the words in the following sltra with

the words in the preceding sdcra ) also. An example of this

form of anuvrtti is found in 1.3+. The word r'ft i ' i in the

. statements are noteworthy : qa qia a[asit i(t{zi gcllqa q

aIECirs: ( Suiruta. sec. on Tanffayuk6i ); sfiErqtCtCqtci

sr{cs}qq alqil€t;r {4(q ( Slbarabha;va 2.1'l ); q*g

qfca qtlrslqr64r{t{q ( Pradipa on Mbh' B'4' 30 )'

s. qi eraq qErF{ gqfqs:rft, str(6td g qtsaqfqi$*

" ' ' " i r fqq(qqi 'dqrEfe ( Prad Pa on Mbh' 8.2.e0 )

A note on the sfitras in the Yogasfrtra 61.

following strra (1.35) is to be connected with this siltra in order

to make the meaning of the sirtra complete ( aid'e T. Vai ).

For connecting the words in the preceding slrtras with

the words in the following sr-rtras, sometimes the case-endings

of the words ( in the preceding sil.tras ) are required to be

changed so as to con$true them properly rvith the words in the

lbllowing sfi.tras. This process is known as uibhakti-ai'patiyatna.

Anexampleof th is processis foundin2.22. The word n l , t tcot

in this siltra is to be connected with the word dr!1as2a in the

preceding su 2.21. As the word is in the sixth ca'e-tnding it

is required to be changed in the {lrst case-ending so that it may

be connected with na;Iarn, a word in the first case-ertding.

Like the change in the case-ending we sometimes find

alteration in the sense of a word ( existing in a preceding sutra )

when it is connected with a word in the following sfrtra.

The word tas2ainsr . t .2 .27 is an example of th is k i r r l . As tas2a

( fad used in the sixth case-ending ) is a pronoun, lt must refer

to the word uiaekakhyati in the preceding srltra 2.26. As the

word aiaekakh;tati is feminine it cannot be referr,:d to by tasla,

a word of masculirre gender. Thus we are compelled to take

the word oioekakh2afi in the scnse of arutkal;h1,dti 'ntat ( one who

possesses 'oi,aekakhlati ), a word in rnasculine gender so that ,dtla

can be grammatically conrrected with it. The Bha.ya Passage

c(}fd ccaFE(QqId-: I l i4lr{r{: shows that the word

oiaekakhltdti in sn 2.26 is to be taken in the sense as shown

above.6

Indicator2 or sztggesti,ue power of the expressi.ons i,n the TS.

A srrtra is usually regarded as srtci'tdrtha ( indicative of a

number of senses not expressly stated in the body of the siltra )'

6. According to us Bhiksu is wrong in holding that d€a mayrefer to €rt)$q in su. 2.26. This view is not in conso-nance with the Bh-a-sya sentence ip}k.,..... The ry61;XcigfEdfEasa4Tfd must be taken to be an example ofBahuvrihi comp^und.

- 62 An Introduction to the Yogasiltra

Tbat is why the authors of the ancient works in srr.tras refrained

from stating in the body of the sirtras all those senses which mig[t

be known through ar thApild or presumption (T5tparyatika I . I '2)7

There are some wellknown devices through which these unex-

pressed senses can be known definitely. A few examples of such

urrexpressed senses as stated by the commentators are given here:

( I ) The Vyasabhlqya says that the non-use of the word

sorla in the word cittaaytti in sltra 1.2 indicates that the

scmprajfrato form of samadhi ( concentration ) in which ail

thearttis are not restricted is also to be known as yoga' Had

patafrjali said. saraaei,ttauytti,ni.rodha in str. 1.2 only the asampra-

jnaL fotm of concenilation would have been regarded as yoga'

( 2) Smrti( memory ) has been read in the lasrplace in

the siltra enumerating the five ulllis gglqfqcdqfaqecfaElttCIqi

( 1.5 ). This placing, according to the Vivarana comm' (l ' l l) '

indicates that memory is caused by all the aTttis ( *gi: xmotrfe'

qriEfq+tdesiq atia faivt: ).( 3 ) V6,caspati says that though the word urtt i in srr. l. l0

defining nidrdis useless, for it is read in the section ( prakarana )

which treats of vrtti, yet the word has been used by Pataffjali

with rhe intention of laying stress on the fact that nidr-a is alss

a vgtti ( awareness that exists in dreamless sleeps ) - a view that

was regarded as invalid by some eminent thinkers.

( 4 ) Vacaspati says that the word lakti has been used in

the expression dyg-d.ariana lakti' ( in 2.6 / with a view to indica-

ting tbe relation tbat exists between seer ( dr{ ) and dar!ana (the

cognitive principle, i. e. buddhie )'The relation is said to be of

the nature ol 1og1ata, i. e. the capacity to be an enjoyer and tobe an object to be enjoYed'

( 5 ) The Vivarar.ra says that Patafljali has not formed a

compound word like Ece-gsq-dq'lq in sI. 2.17 ( but used two

7. qf€ qqiiqcd qzFI{I Esiqfia ( Tatparvatika 1.1.2 ).8. frar+rrg gioe] ritemlolr{Tkd lecfdcff,ltk gfn*i f,a}aq r

9. egrhclftfa s+rat taluT+,grrlreq]: q'irqaloeui seret ariiu{qffrqqqr{ |

A note on the sirtras in the Yogasutra 63

wordl, namcly a6e-€{qq}: and dq}rr: ) in order to indicate

that drastg and dqSya are of absolutely opposite nature ( bhinna.juo1otoa'i.to

' '

( 6 ) As tcrwhy Patafljali has formed two separate words,

naruely pariqama-tapa*sarilskara-duftkhd and guq'a-aytli-airodha

ernbodying two sets of arguments to prove the assertion of'larvadr duhkham' in 2.15 instead of forming one expression likerparinirna-tIpa-sarhskdra-guna-vrtti-virodha' ( with the third

or the fifth case-ending ), the Vivarar..a remarks that as the

second argument is highly subtle in comparison to the first

argument, no compound was formed with these two words.llThe commentator expressly says that only the advanced practi-

tioners of yoga can realize- the nature of guqaaytti'oirodha. (oppo.sition of the fluctuations o[ the gu'ras ).

( 7 ) The Vivarana says that though Patafijali mentioned

drSya after dras[r in 2.17 yet at the time of showing their

characteristics etc. in the subsequent sirtras we find him todescribe drdya ( 2.lB-19 ) before drastr (2.20) with a view to'indicating the fact that the realization of the dras(r dependsupon the realization of the dr$ya,l2 i. e. one may realize thedrastr after realizing properly the modifications of the dgdya.

10. Eseesqdqlq ek g 6rifi6l gcrr[srTfffiq€qi aq]N;csrqtqcs-

ar1lcilsfq. Further remarks given here by the commen-

tator deserve attention of the advanced students ofyoga:

q]*grrrrqa]: €s(qrfqi]: cqrqgtqq]frfe ar qa'fag' crqq(-qq, (errflq F6geaqq€qqtt qcgeqqrlcq s'q'lq'l qr;qqiaEcciq.

ll. ag q fsqsi'qi gur'Farifmflnqr ? qrqar qfiqrcarqsrilc

gcrgfrfa<)sl frfia *daqq r iq e,lq: t sg{:qrgrrirf,qqrqEr!sdqacfsar qf( qRulrqatqdsst?E:€f(fd fdfEuzr: I d(.snur-farrtqatcfseffia(q'q fs++cr{sa} gql?fflfar'fqr fst'qr gk,/qT6(srq I sda: e-{geeern;qTE qmq"rs;qrs: I

r 2. ;ig q aEggs4q'lkig*6 Hdqi I (tE sqcrsqft{qr4 EsE(q-otta Xai'Efsarlq r iq Elc: I g{qtaqqtqqqgal6qqlq ?6q.(q6qrqdlqw{ ( lr tq ).

6,$ An fntroduction to the Yogasdtra

( B ) The Vivara4a remarks that though oiparyay,'

( erroneous knowledge ) being a form of avidla, is required to

be restricted at first and as such it shculd have been mentioned

in the fir-"t place in the sirtraenumerating the lrttis ( l'5 ), yet.

prom,-)4a has been read in the first place to indicate the fact that

without pranarya ( meaning here gu4a-dogru1fr'ana, valid know'

ledge of defects and merits ) there can be no endeavour to

restrict ai'par1a1ta ( i. e. as the anti-yogic character of oiparyy

is known through Pranal'a it has been mentioned in the first

place ).13

( 9 ) The order of enumeration in the sltras is always

found io be significant. The commentators have shown that in

rhe sirlra 1.20 lwhich mentions five up-ayas namely ltaddhA,etc'\'

the preceding means is the cause of the following means'

A similar relation is found in sil. 2.+l mentioning the

five results of lau,eo.ta

13. See the pa'sage : 3Tfqil q isqdq tf( s qa sITFrI?A;f

farlquau: "- "'siqlqq, sltilq srqrzr l4qziqtq fctlq+lqaqt

(qrfs UEIE'Isflrqtqe{eslq ft<-itT' xla gtwngi:,"""il€qrq

scrorgiltE srq1uf gilq I flOt s gqlElsl scl0ifd-(E{-'6t

fqqzlqrfriqnq ( faqlur llq ).14. The examples given here are taken from the commentaries.

In a large number of rrlaces commentators are found to be

silent about the suggested sense of words used in the YS.

Take the sEtra 66] calsfs(ai f,qq,<qils: cqlqs4ss(3.48).

Here si,ddhis are mentioned by using three different words,

though they could have been mentioned in one compound

word, namely cciqfses-fs{rol{Ft-cETTdqrrlsiT. Theuse of three separate words suggests that ( i ) these threesi,ddhi,s are not related to one another, ( ii ) that they

are dissimilar in nature and that ( iii ) different stages

of qFaava are re quired to acquire them; cp. Maska.r in9s bh6Fya on G Dh. S.8.21.

b,J

6 a note on the sfitras in the yogasfitra 65

Irrcgularitics in thc siltras

Various kinds of irregurar use or construction are foundin the srr,tras. Generally such irregularities are accepted as validby accepting the principle that ,the expressions in the sttras areslmilar to the Vedic expressions' ( Chandoaat sntrapi bhaoanti, ).tr

An example of irregular placing of words is found in str.1.46 ( dT qq siflq: eerfv: ). Vacaspati remarks that the

word eoa is out ofplace ( bhinna-krama ) i. e. it should have beenread after the word sabiia,ra

Irregular use ofcase.ending is found in a few slrtras. Instttra 3. 19 the sixth case-ending has been used jn the wordprdt)a)a, which should have been used in the seventh case_ending as we find in the sntras of similar kind. For examplesee the sttras 3.23, 3.27,5,29,3.82, etc. in which the names ofthe things on which saiytama is to be practised are used inthe seventh case-ending (Candre, Dhruoc etc.). This showsthat the use of sixth case-ending in the word prou,oJdin siitra3. 19 is irregular'. Since the Bhagya uses the word prauaJe (aword with seventh case_ending ) while explaining thiss[ltra, there is no doubt that the use of the sixth case_endingis irregular, or we may say that it is an example of ggcq$ qgl]

15. Thoughitis held by Kaiyata that tbe field of the ny6yaq;El?fq gefw rrefie is the siitras of vyskarasa ;"i,( Pradipa on Mbh. l. l . l ), yetthe works on slstras otherthan vylkara:ra are found to contain irregular uses ofcase-endings etc., qrfii66 are usually solved by taking resortto this nydya. For the real import of this ny_aya, r"u *yqfqt'tq aql${o1 .rr Brgvito;T, pp. 96-100.

16. It is remarkable to note that qiT is often found to havebeen used out of place by ancient teachers; uiilc Saba,i-'bhlsya 10.8.35; Devabodha's comm. on Sabh6_p. 57,14;Mahabhdsya t.4.27, 4. I. I ; gk._prdtisakhya 4.37 ; padamafr.jar i on Kei ikA 7. l . lB.

6O An Introduction to the Yogasdtra

Irregularity in the use of sarhjflE {abda is also found in

the YS. The word asmita is used as the name of a kleia in2.6

and as a particular alambana in 1.17; it is also used in the sense

of aharirkara ( the third aspect of the organs ) in 3.47.

The word aife;a has been used as a technical term in 2.19;

it is also used as a non-technical word in 1.49 and 4.25.LI

The word oi,torka is found to have been used in l. 17, I.42, 2.33 and

2.34 in differnt technical senses. Dh-aran6. of a particular kind

is called Videha ( feminine gender ) while the word oidcha is

usedin thesense ofa particular class of yogins in 1.19. The

word pratyolo has been used in the sense of cittaaytti' and hetu

in different sfrtras.

Use of verb lorms i'n the TS.

In the whole body of the YS. we find the use of only two

hi2a-padas, namely e{tqf in 2.52 and qIfiA in 3.36. It may

be asked : what was the r€aron for not composing these two sl,tras

as (I(l: sffir{tra{q{4: and ((: crfilT"""'srefil q;q ?

It appears that Patafljali used the verb forms ( instead ofusing substantives, namely kyya and janman ) to indicate a subtle

sense. The word k;i2ate is a form of the karmakartyuacya ( oideVamana's Kdvy6hnk5rasntra 5.2 ) and as such it indicates

naturality or easiness of the act ofdwindling; to be explicit : as

a result of practising prln-ay5ma the prakdsa-aaarat.xas f coverings

of the light ) get dwir,dled naturally and no seperate effort isneeded to destroy them. The use of the verb form lays stress

on the natural rise of this spiritual result of a physical act ofbreathing, It is to be noted that there is no exaggeration in itas the yogic priu-riySma is not the same as the physical exercise

of breathing.

17. Cp. the paribhi;a eqqqfdf{€ qqfd-,a worci may be usedin a technical as well as in a non-technical sensel' For an

elucidation of this paribhaqd, see Mahabhegya on Pa. I.1,22.The intended sense is determined either by context or bythe traditional exposition.

A note on the sEtras in the yogasirtra 67

We may also think that patanjali used the tiianta wordsas he had to show present tense in order to indicate ar irnportuntfact. The present tense in krlyate indi.cates that .in proportionas the prelltlyama is foliowed up, so the veil .f k""*;d; ;";.dwindled;' that is to say thar the dwind,li,ng

"f pra*,ifur"i"io

does not depend on the final development ofprenaydma; cp.Cakrapdni's comment on the Caraka purrugu C&qIICdft{f€Iq€qTEII: sTtf{Ttqqlqere rrqrrqq qfsaar: (srrira 6.16). pari'amatahis a word ending in the suffix iatr bearing the sense of ht_t,dkaro( present tense ).

The purpose of using the form qrq?d in 9.36 is toindicate frequency in the act of rising, i. e. patafljali rneans tosay that prdtibha and other powers uiire f".quently in a yoginpossessing puruga-jftand, even ifhe has no volition to producethem

( i. e. they come into existence without sarigtana). TheBh:igya has used the word nit,am ( in connection with the riseof these powers ) which, i. ttru p"u.".rt context. means nothingbut frequency. The word ni.t1,i* in the sense of frequency orrepetition is often found in ancient works ( pada Astddhyiyi5.1.76 and 8.1.4 with commentaries ), and Vatsylyana,s bhasyaon 2.1.+2 ( kqilfd fmqr+crs: ).."

18. As to how the word ftee signifies the sense of continuedrepetition ( arsteoa ) the following remarks of Kai_y ata arc note-worthy; r,.TEqT

fttawaaqn gatqeeoryqJ !aals{:,sld(T?dtgf:{sffttelsfiq, ailrfts04 g lmqtceoa.lqs{Feurztrftclsei:, qfs€q'lqof:qil{r;qfifqiq

fl? srrhrq 1 pradipa8.1.4 ) .

7A NOTB ON THE VARIANT READINGS IN THE

YOGASUTRA

The present discussion on the variant readings is entirely

based on the printed texts. The variant readings in the YS. are

of two kinds; either ths variants are expressly mentioned by the

commentatorsl or a reading accepted by a commentator seems to

be unknown to another comnientator.z

Usually the original reading of the sirtras in the YS. are

determined with the help of the Vylsabhagya, which, however,

clearly refers to the words in the strtras in a small number of

placos only. ( It is not the purpose of a bhd;ya to explain most of

the words or even all the important words io a sltra.)s It is how-

ever unanimously agreed that the readings of the sitras in the YS.

l. 3{" Fcrg{rqlfElc cI6: sICtfE{(qrE gqersiiq: (Y.-r'ar. l.l7);

e?indlefqi( qiSscqqlqtef: ( Y.-var. t.25 ); gqtg$qf

g:qtgalqlewdqt qta: ( Vivarar.ra 2"7 ); q;aqilil is readin 2.8 ); gqgiatsclwkf( ficfE*fla (Y.-var. z.l5 );aln;d-aTifi(DF( qIE6a ( Canririka 2,47 1; *qr[oaEq]s

cld) fEtw""""fosqrl t Ucrsqifqr ( Vivarana 2.19 ).2. The reading fstqrfstqFeq.rrcr"Ifes[r: { 2.19 ) is not

found in commentaries other than the VivaraLra. The

comm. has afforded reasons to justify the reading

adopted by him. The reading €siqlqTlEfiTq ( in a.31 )is found in the Candrikii only ( all other comm. read:

sqiqcqqoitffq ).3. Bhdsyas are sometimes found not to comment on all

the s[tras of the text; see the Mahdbhasya and the Sabara"bhasva.

A note on the variant readings in the Yogasatra 69

.are fairly correct and that it would be wrong to doubt theirgenuineness without showing stronEl reasons.

It is surprising to note that the oldest available commentaryon the VyS,sa.bhd'-.ya called Tattvavai$aradi by VAcaspati does notshow variants in the readings of the s-utras. Vijflanabhiksu, anothercommentator of the Vyasabhlsya (l6th century), showed variantreadings in afew places ( e. g. 1.17, 1.25, 2.15 ). The Vivara-{ra commentary, which seems to have been composed afterVScaspatr, also sholved v?riants in the srttras in two or threeplaces onlya. In the direct commentaries on the YS. by Bhoja,BhdvlganeJa and others we find a considerable number ofvariants, some of wliich arc not found in the aforesaid comment-aries on the Bh6sya Except a fetv none of the variants bear anyimportance, as their imports are not different from those of theother readings.

We sometimes find examples of editorial error in the read.

ings of the siltras. As for txample the word tsfldqHt: readin the sirtra 4.34 in the short commentary by Ndge(as evidentlyseems to be an editorial error, for the word actually explained

in the corrmentary is fkftsrian:. It is not necessary to multiplysuch examples.

Some editors are foLrnd to conceive variarrt readings onthe basis of the explanatory passages in the commr:ntaries. Inmost cases the process is misleading, for the usual practiceof the commentators is that the;' use wellknown and easierwords in the place of obsolete anC diff icult words used in theoriginal text without giv*'rg any i lCication that the-"e words are

4. gergnzir. g,qTEcl;fk qrtq'i qr6! r\ 2.? ).5. There are two commentaries ( vrttis ) by Nageia-a large

one called Chlya ( pub. in the Bombay Sanskrit and pra-

krit Series No. XLVI ) and a srnall one (pub. in the KashiSanskrit Series, No. 83 ). Dt. Dasgupta wrongly takes

lhe_Claye_vq_tti as a commentary on the Vy-rsabhlsya ( H.;I. P. I. ,p.2r2 ).

70 An Introduction to the Yogastrtra

used by them in the place of the words used in the original text"

The foilowing examples may be considered in this connection'

fn his commentary Bhoja has used the word qiqlTf though the

sfitra ( 3.21 ) contains the word aiicqlTl' It would be wrong to

th inkthataccordingtoBhojathesfr t raconta insthewordslsq. lTr

simply because this very word has been used in the comments on

this stttra without any indication that this word has been used

in the place of sldcqtq' Similarly it is wrong to suppose that

according to Bhoja the s[tra 1.49 contains the word qlcFqfsttct

simply because this very word has been used in the comments on

this so.rtra without the indication that this has been used to ex'

plain the word qlqFqf,qqqt in the sirtra. In fact Bhoja- has used the

word qTrtl;qfeqqt for the word wqfqqqt in the original text as

this word shows the intended sense more clearly than the word

aFqfqq4t6. This principle has its exception also'

The commentatort do not seem to follow always those

words in the original text that begin with sucb upasargat as are

more or less anarthakos ( i'e., there does not arsie any appreciable

change in meaning if they are not used )' As for example thoragh

the sotra 4.25 contains the word ainiu'1tti,, some commentators

are found to use the word ni'u'ytti' Similarly we find the use of

the word samapti in some commentaries though the sntra (4''32)

contains the word pari'samdpti' Instances of opposite kind are

also noticed. A few commentators use the wotd prajoalanam

though the sr'r*a ( 3.40 ) contains the word jualanom'

A similar use is found in the case of suf8xes' Though the

siltra 4.13 contains tbe word aTqfifqfqtflq yet some commentari-

of our commentators are found

almost in all the branches of Sanskrit literature' While

Pdnini used the word qqlqf,sucq in 6' 3' I09' the

Mahlbhdsya o*"6 gqf,esafa' In the ifasst(aqt+(q the

3i1.6.22 contains the word o]'r, while its vrtt i uses ![6'

A note on the varient readings in the yogasiltra 7l

es are found to use the word arqRolirlq ( arfturfuea las thesame meaning as dtTftullc ) it being easier and shorter thansTqf{qfcea. A similar tendency is found in connection withcompound words. As for example some commentators use thewords ftssel 3lf{acel: ( t .S i though the sirra conrains thecompound word ResaTF*osg1".

There are however cases in which the actual forms of wordsin the original text ( as read by the commentators ) may borightly inferred on the basis of the words used in the explanatorypassages in the commentaries. Such passages are worded in sucha way that the forms of the words ( in the original text ) asread by the commentators may be definitely determined. As forexample the explanatory passages e{AeTftfqgrTs[E4€tq in thecomm. R:Ljamtrrtarlqla and Candrika clearly show that theirauthors read afqqglqqfq in the sEtra 4.20 (and not aFTqql{qfqas read by others). The commentatorscannot besupposed towritean explanatory sentence showing a reason ifthe word in the origi-nal text does not bear the same character. Similarly, theexplanatory passage in the Candrika on sitra 4.33 clearly indica.tes that the commentator read the stltra as containing the wordsqftqtc: atqrFdfqqfEt: and nor qftqtcrqlFcfautqt as read byothers. The word q+tqil used in the Bhojavftt i 1onyS.2.4l)positvely indicates that its author read this very word in thesfrtra ( in the place of ttTrc as read by others ), for herethe commentator had given a definition of a term used not byhim but by the original author and as such it was quite naturalfor the commentator to use the same word as had been used inthe text. Similarly the mutual connection ot the relevant wordsin tbe commentary by Bhoja on sir.rra 2.27 suggests that Bhojaread fl;a{ql in the siltra and not tff?ilIfq: as read byothers.

The proper way of determining the readings of the sitras asaccepted by the commentators is to observe their readings asgiven in the pratikas in the cornmentaries. occasional state-me$ts of the commentators that such and such expressions are

72 An Introduction to the Yogasittra

sdutras ( i. e. used in the sltras ) are the best helping factors in

deterrnining the original readings of'the sLrtras.

'It is needless to say that on account oi the absence of

reliable editions of the commentaries the aforesaid way cannot

always be followed successfully, as the following examples

would show :

( i ) One may be inclined to think that the sirna 1.49

contains the word qla ( and not %i1 ), for the printed reading

of the commentary Candrika is qlasriqcalaq. It is however

quite likely that the printed reading is corrupt and the correct

reading is q6qTq'qil;I{r for the BhIsya. and some of the

commentators clearly read *1-6 and take it in the sense of

qtrT{Fqilr?r.

( ii ) Similarly it may be considered that according to the

Vivarapa comm. the sEtra 3.20 reads { q FJta;'lqq and r'ot

;T q aq €ts€il;rq, for the word '6q is not found in the printed

reading of the commentary. As the commentary has been

edited with the help of only one manuscript ( uide Intoduction'

xxuii), one may rightly think that the reading of the comm' is

corrupt and that it should be corrected to ;f ? €( (Ilocq;l{, the

reading supported by all other commentatols. It is quite natural

to read a pronoun ( here d( ) with the adjectival expression

ilosqqq.

( iii ) The Vivarala comm. reads tf? as the first vrord of

the sltra 3.12, which, according to all other commentators, is

a6:. (s appears to be a corrupt reading for (Gi' It may here be

supposed that since eTq: means 'in samddhi'or 'at the time when

samadhi or sanddhi,paripama afises' the word (d3 was replaced by

6? in later period in order to express the sense of adhikaraqa

in a clear way.

The difference in the readings of the s-utras may be deter'

mined with much certainty by observing the tfHrrsfqs as girnn

A note on the varient readings in the Yogasltra 73

'by the commentators. For example, from the remarks of Viva-

raga ( fqfttft sl.tgtiE: ) it appears that in his tradition the

sutra was read as lqqqeiil ?rI q?fflt(q?il ftqfafqqFt{Tl while

all other commentators read {T€l before ftqfefqqfiqf,t. As

the context shows that the sthiti must belong to the citta { ot

manas ), the use of fqfl(q ( or tav: ) was considered useless.

As the Bhhgya refers to the reading qEg:, it is reasonable to

coflclude that the sutra was read without the word TTq€: by

a teacher of later age.

There is little doubt that in a number of cases the variant

readings in the YS. are due to the mixture of the Bh6sya words

( usually called p-atanika ) with the initial words of the siltras.

For example the siltra 1.26 is read by some as beginning with

the two words g qq:, both of which, in fact, constitute the

pdtanika of the Bhasya on this sritra. Similar is the case with

the reading of ttre sltra 2.50 as accepted by Anantadeva. Asimilar case is found in sir. 2,30. Some read it as beginning

with Aa, evidently an expression in the Bhagya. The Viva-

rana reads che sltra 3.14 beginning with the word iofrc, though

other commentators take tatra as a word io the pdtanika of the

Bhagya. t3ne may think that the words (f ( constitute thepannika of the Bh?isya, which are wrongly read in the

s'ftra 1.14.

It is noteworthy that in a few places the commentators

have disregarded the readings of the s[tras that are accepted

by the Bhdsya. For example, the sirtra 2.3 must be supposed

to contain the word ccq if we read it accotding to the

Bhdsya (mark the question ftq;a) il in the pannikd), though

some commentators read the sltra without the word {5{.

In conclusion we want to draw the attention of the readers

to the fact that since the peculiar readings of some of the sEtras

.as recorded in the Vivarana commentary have not been referred

to by other commentators, it may be surrnised that this cotnttreo'

74 An Introduction to the Yogasotra

tary represents a different recension ot'the Yogasfrtra. We maycall it the 'southern recension'. The Kapilasuri dialogue in theSanti-parvan of the Mahabherata ( Kumbhakona ed. ) indicatesthat there was a Sd.mkhyan school in south India. It is quitelikely that the Jayamangald comm. on the Sarnkhya-kerika wascorrrposed by a person belonging to tfis school, and that most

probably the authors of the two commentaries are identical.

8

WRONG READINGS OF A FEW SUTRAS

Some of the readings of the siltras as accepted by different

commentators do not seem to be correct. A ferv ol'such readings

are going to be discussed here.

i i ) Bhikgu and his followers read tficrtllTtq in YS'

1.16 in the place of ffisqlqsq as read by V6casPati and

others.l According to us ({ggTslan{ is the eortect reading'

for the questlon aaf f* €4lq expressed in the last part of

this sirtra becomes intelligible ii we accept the reading

(IEgc[sf{q. Moreover if we accept the reading degglul$q, a

a rryord like fqtrqtt requires to be read in the scrtra ( as

doneby Bhiksu ) so that the argument embodied in the sirtra

becomes complete, while no such addition becomes at all nece-

ssary if we accept the reading dEscluTfiq. It is a compound

worcl and requites to be dissolved as <E (i ' " ' fsf,q:atqq)

sTEcIui q€q aq. 'It is wrong to take the expression d€g{TuT:[{

as two separate words (namely d( and elcclqmq) as is found

in some m6dern works. The suffir t in this expression 5hswr

that it is an example of Bahuvrihi compound'

( 2 ) Bhc.ja ( in some editions of his vrtti ) 'qlf:q"J'

seem to iead saamin in theplace of sthanin in YS' 3'51 ({qI?gcFT'

c??O ), as a synonym cf those celestial beings who invite

a yogin of higher order to enjoy mundane pleasure' According

to us the correct reading is sthanin' The word sthAni'n as t}:ie

1. Whether the sentence n 6{fqf,di{ E(g (EgqTqI{ <IEI

ia tarq is a strtra or not, is doubtful' Most probably it

belongs to the Bh-asYa.

An Introduction to the Yogasitra 76

name of a particular class of gods is well known, for in the

Puriirlas wc find the word sthanabhimanin in connection with aparticular class of gods (Krrrma-p. 1.7.31-33).2 The word sodrninis never used as a sy{lonym ofgods, though in the Puranas we find

deities named Tilakasvtimin and Salilasvr.imin. The sthdnins inthe YS. appear to be a particular class of gods having lordshipover l irnited regions.

( 3 ) According to Bhoja the s[, 1.29 contains the word

$iq{+(;fT and not uer{ra}qia as accepted by others. The correct

form of the rvord seerns to be 5eq'rq{T, for we find the use

of the words t<ie and :[(q'$'ttq in the sense of the self sr

inner self in the works dealing with yoga and self-knowledge;cp. the word pratyagetman, in which Arr?an stands for cctana.

Cetana means {one that i l luminates' ( ?afdtfe ?at: )- a

sense which is in consonance with Sdrirkhya-Yoga metaphysics.Cetand, ( a teminiire word ) on the other hand ( being derived

form the root ci,l with the suffix;uac i. e. anal see Par.rini 3.3.107in the sense at bh-aoa ) canrrot be taken as a synonym of cetanas.

( a ) Brroja thinks that tlie name of the supernormal power

ofperceiving divine touch ( sparla sarhuid ) in sil. 3.36 is acdana

( ending in e ) while others take the name as uidana ( ending in

a ). It is proper to take the name as oed,ana, fcr the names of all

2. The appropriateness of the u:e of the word sthdni'n (derived

fi'om the word sfiana with the suffix ani ) may be known

from the follouing statements of daukardcdrya : rWifata'

*ia+qFafqq"aq q?frIiEsIaETs ( Sarirakabbagya 1.,".?8 );ali i{Iq qt{ ?ao}+:, afec;atetfu qTaT qTqiisi ?sil tqtd*d

fetqt] tarvrig qtal: ( Bhasya on Tai'up. o.B ).

3. 'Ihe meaning of the word cetan-a may be known from the

following authorita,ive statementr : 3" kfl ' I idg6T

faFa+rr ?a'ir %sr I gs'E:bt( qrcTg{g:qrqgtta < tr( sianti-p. 219.1l); gdwtorcr cT +(il esq't gFi: (Vana-

,p . lB1 . 23 ) .

Wrong readings of a few sltras 7T

the other siddnis mentioned in this sfrtra end in c and not in a.

We have proved elsewhere that the name of the sixth siddftt]

mentioned in this sfrtra is aarta and \ot aartd ( ending in a ).Moreover the word aedana is used in philosophical lite-

rature in the sense of sukhaduftkha, har$-iokaand,the like. oreven in the sense of j:,ana, or ( very rarely ) in the senle of

safiskara-ailcg. It is never used in any system in the sense of apartieular kind of supernormal power.

( 5 ) Mr. P. C. Chakravarty after quoting the passage

sqqr faR{ sk sqfq qqqT of the Ariya-pariyesana sutta

(29) of Maj jhimanikdya remarks : "This reminds us of the

YS. 1.20 where also the said terms are mentioned successively.The only difference lies in the fact that the term sati, in the Pali

text is not recorded by Pataiijaii" ( O. D. S. S. T., p.Bg )(sati= snyti in Sanskrit ). I may inform the readers that all

the commentators of the YS. unanimously read the word smJfiwhile explaining this sirtra. The Bhl"ya has shown the causeand effect of sm'yti in clear words.

( 6 ) Mr. C. M. Codd tir inhs tirat the sittra 1.30 ( on obs-tacies ) speaks of eight obstacles oniy ( and not of nine obsta-cles as is accepted by others ), for after explaining auirati,, rhesixth obstacle, he remarks : (,the last two also explain them-selves" ( p. 56 ) That this sr-rtra speaks of nine obstacles hasbeen expressly stated by the Bh5sya ( naaantura)Ai eittasla ) andhas been accepted by the commentators.

It may be clearly seen that Mr. Codd reads the first sevenobstacles as read in the commentaries and that he renders theobstacle read in the eighth place by 'lack of insight and inabi-

lity to concentrate' ( p, 52 ). It is not clear ( i ) whether this

rendering is of anaaasthi,tatoa or ctf alabdhabhami,kalaa or ( ii ) theauthor has ta ken the express io n' aI ab d habhamik at o a- ana a a s t hit a t tt a'as the name of one single obstacle and has rendered it by 'lack of

insight and inability to concentrate'. Whatever may be the case,

it is wrong to think that the sr-rtra 1.30 speaks of eight obstacles

only.

78 An Introduction to the Yogasfitra

( 7 ) In his R6jayoga Svdmin Vivek-ananda reads g{qaqlfe;in l. l6 while all commentators read gACACTtr. The reading

g€q€qTf(: is not in accordance with the Bhdgya, for theBf,agya tal,es !€{{{iltszT1g (which is practically the same as

gAqazfffu) as the cause of $qigsq and as such the use of the

fifth case-ending in this word is justified. Logically $cr*gruqand guveatfa cannot be taken as identical and geet{tlA

cannot be regarded as the same as paraaairdglat while paraaai-figJa is one of the two moans of oyttinirodha, puruEakhlati is thedirect means of attaining isolation.

( 8 ) Swamiji does not read the wor6 51ilT in si,. 2. 27.Since the word fl?qfq is an adjective ( sT?ilr {T+} ctt ortt(fi: according to the noun intended ), a word shorvingthe noun ( here $f,T ) is required to be given in tho siltra.The Bhe;ya also is in favour of reading Fflt in this sfitra(cp. {ot ssfqqt sTT;-<TFqcilq... ...).

( 9 ) M.N. Dwivedi reads

Q ( eer lA felfil+d'- ) wbichthe traditional commentators.

sitra does not serve any purpcse,

be wrong.

the siitra 4.26 with the word

is however not accepted by

As the use of Q in thisthe reading must be taken to

IA VERSE OF THE KB$NACARITA ON THE YOGASUTRA

King Samutlragupta in the prast-auand verces of his Krena'

carital speaks of the Yogasiltra and its author in the following

manner :

F*u)ft+agureat {TIT€rIT(ai qtt: I

ceqfo ifae<) qc{q} fagui uct tt

6d lt arrrs{qrrlrli asil{T}qnq Iqqlfeaqrq"{+ a}m t}tnu3 6(I: ll

rruq;scd 6IEq Altariauqgaq tqlqaqrcqtq{d (Iq lrsd ftna'lxqq tt

\A/e are concerned here with the third verse ( t{€ln?STIq

... ). Though the verse looks very simple, yet some of its expre''ssions are such as require to be explained. The importance of

the verse may be understood from the fact that scholars like Pt.

Udayavira Sestrin ( in utraaria *r aleqtu, pP. 5l +"523 i,

Pt. Yudhigthira Mrmarirsaka ( in St6( -4t6(nt {tt(s sT qkqrc

chaps. l0 and 30 ) and Dr. Ady:pras-ada Mirira ( in Yiea<rf;f

+1 tFe6rfet qtrq{T, pp. lB2-187 ) were compelled to

deal with this verse in detail.

That the word. ltogadarlana in this verse refers to the YS.

is beyond doubt. The meaning of the two epithets, mahananilt

,maJa and, ad,bhuta is sufficiently clear. The epithet cittatlogdha

l. About the genuineness of the 6sqlsft6 the following

.remarks of Dr. R. D. Banerjee are worth noticing: "We

intend to publish them I i. e. the leaves of the AEoIifRd ]with our Introduction, notes and block-prints ofthe photo-

graphs, giving incontrovertible proofs of their genuineness

( Pre-historic, Ancient and Hindu India, P. 117 ).

80 An lntroduction to the Yogasi-rtra

( destroyer of mental blemishes ) is to be taken in an indirectsense i. e., it is not the text itself but the divine knowledge orthe yoga practice described in the yS. that is the destroyer ofmental blemishes.

The two epithers, namely )ogd-aJakhlAnabhatu and kaaydeserve consideration. According to pt. Udayavlra and Dr.Adyaprasad,a they mean ,a poem by patafrjali containing anexposition of yoga'.2 This shows that the verse in question doesnot refer to the well-known YS. ( as it is not a poem ) bur toanother work by Patafijali. As there is no evidence to provethe existence of a poetical work on yoga composed by patafijali,

the aforesaid views cannot be taken as valid. It would be hazyto assume that Patafljali had a poetical composition on yogasimply because the aforesaid verse of the Krsgracarita says so.

It is worthy of notice that the verse contains both thewords ygadarlana and )0goryakbtanabhil,ta. This tends to showthat the word 2ogadar.fana must be taken as the name of a workwhich is described by the adjectival expression ltogaoydkh2ana-bhata. 'fhe word jtogaddrrana cannot but mean the yogasLrtra.for it is here said to be a composition of patafljali, who is regar-ded as the author of the Mahabh:isya I in the second verse ).The verses of the prastdudnd are based on our .traditionl histori,and it is well known that 'tradition' regards patafljali as theauthor of these two works. As the word aldkaranabhA;y in thesecond verse means the Mahlbhlsya on the Agadhyayi ( andnot any other bhisya ) on the strensth of ,tradition, so the word2ogadarlana cannot but mean the l'cgasu-tra onlv.

It appears that the word kaaya usually meaning .a poem',.lies at the root of all wrong and confused views. According tous the word kday in this verse is not a noun, but an adjective( meaning oarnani,)6, attractive, graceful, charming ) qualifying

2. "qd=qFo i qlrr sT azrlaqnT( 6l6qqq ffq fotsl,' ( ei. <. e.p.515 ); "qiq * 64laqrn1d frsi +raqrecs T)TtT?c dt<sqT fr'sT?f(rd q<tsqfu ${ i dt {1,, ( ur.e.t.c. p. t84 ).

6 A vefso of the Kgpnacarita gl

the noun yogodariana; uida Devabodha's comm. on Mbh. Udyoga-p. 36.3; 9t 20. Kauga in this sense may be appropriately appliedto the YS. ( It is to be derived from the root,tu I g rfet ]with he suffix olq. )

Pt. Y. Mimarhsaka thinks that mahilnantla or mohAnawloma2ais the name of the versiFed composition of patafljali (I, p. 33a; iI;p, 380 ;. He further says that this work contains an expositionof yoga and explains the word ygadarlana as .dealing with thesupernormal powers (siddhis )' ( I, p. 317 ). We however failto find the validity of these views. If the word mahanandamayeis taken to be the name ol a literary composition, it is impossifbto consuue it with the word ygadarlana, the name of anotherwork. The verse cannot reasonably be explained to mean thattwo works of Pataf,jali are referred to by it. To take the wordyoga in the restricted sense of supernormal powers requires stronggrounds, which are wanting here. There ssems to be no justifi.cation for naming a poem Mahdnandamaya which treats of thesupernormal pourers only. Morever it is extremely difficult toarsett that any work dealing with the *upernormal powers onlywat Compo3ed by ancient teachers. l.fone of the aforeraid prob-lems arise if we take the word kaoya as an adjectirre as shownabovc.

I have a conjecture on the wotd molwtndonala. It appearrto be a corrupt rcading. We may takc the original rcading armohgngutaln, molalnga being the higbert form of yoga ar statdin some of the PurdBar f Kurrnaj, Z. ll.5l and the laterUpanisads ( Yogariikha.up. 1.129-lB0 ).

a

CHAPTER

i l lTHE AUTHOR OF THE YOGA.

sUrna

ITHE NAME PATAfrJALI

Before d*iling with the life of Pataf,jali, the author of theT5., we are to say something about this name. It is to be noted'that the names of persons of ancient India often create problems,.some of which are difficult to solve. Persons are often cailed bythe names of their gotras (often called laukika gotra) which areenumerated in the works on Dharma:lEstra and Kalpasttra. Aproper name may also be a word derived in the sense of gol,ra,(a technical word of Peninian grammer; see Astddhyayi 4.1.162)also called ayddha by pre-P-a4inian teachers ( KaSika 4..1.166 ).This gotra has nothing to do with the aforesaid laukika gotra.Sometimes we find names which are deri'.red in the sense ofapdt)a, which does not always signify a son. There is a thirdkind of names. These may be regarded as ,proper namesr as theyare not based on the names of ancestors ( we are not consideringhere those names like Kausalya etc. which are based on geogra-phical factors ).4

The problem of names may be exemplified thus. Gargya isthe name of a person. If Gergya is the name of a gotra eachpdrson belonging to this gotra will be called a Gargya. Again,if Garga is a well-established name of pre.Peirinianz times, anydescendent of this Garga beginning with the grandson will be

Vide Safrkara's remarks on the name fqtu4{tq SlgF{ in the

Pra3na.up. o.t ( l6rottTq] irq(:, tl€otct rrat r1€F4: ) I

We have delibarately used the word ,well-established', for weare required to apply the rules of grammar according to theprinciple stated in the verse 'elfq6qffiqciqt

t €ff{r o'l+-fqryel: | {rrcrcier[ reiaqr neil { (gfins., ( This is guotedin the Pradipa commr on Mah6bh6sya 4.1.96 and is attribu.;ted to Bhar{hari; it is however not found in the printedreditions of the Vakyapadiya. ;

l .

t

86 An Introduc'ion to the Yogasutra

called a Gergya. This Gargya is not the same as the G'argya'

belonging tot\etaukikc gotrcGargya' (A few modern scholarsare'

found to har,e confused tt "r"

two gotras and have created blunders

itr identifying persons mentioned in the Purdnas and similar

works ). Again, Gdrgya may bethe actualname of a person

having no connection with Gergya, the gotra, or Garga' 'the

grand-father' technically called the csTrl T5f,6' As the form

ofthe word is the same it is practically impossibleto know the

precise sense of the word, Gdrgya. As a result of the confusing

character of 'names' identification of persons of ancient India

has become a highly difficult and perplexing task' Fortunately

we sometimes find distinctive epithets along with the artificial

names like Gdrgya ( tii,de Prasna'uP. i'I ). Though these epithets

help us in identifying a person yet they are not always so

precise as can render the identification undoubted'

It is gratifying to note that the name Patafrjali is read in

the cba tet o\ gotra in the Matsya'P. ( +rq't<t{: €fteac} qtf€:

qr|{a: qn5:qfs:, 196.25). This must be taken as undoubtedly

indicating the existence of the Patafljali gotra, though this name

is rarely found in the passages on gora'praaaras in authori atrve

works. fn the Gotrapravaramafrjari we find the variant readlng'

qGqdl;ITq which is indicative of the golra q6g1Fo' The form

qdqstl I pl. of qdgo ] is often found in some passages on

gotrdprftlaras ( A few texts read T(9;r also ). rte=erc and

qrceqiT are read in some of the Shtra works ( Izddc the

Satyeg:q{ha and HiranyakeSin s[tras quoted in the Sarirskdra'

mal5 ).

It is to be noted further that the word q6=gq is usually'

read in the Upakddi group ( 2. 4. 69 ) of Per.rini and it is inte'

resting to note that in this sltra the word gotro, accotding to

the commentators, is to oe taken in the sense as stated in the

DharmaSdstra ( and not in the technical sense of grammar 1"

The commentator Ner,yapa however reads the word qescfo

( Prakriydsarvasva, III, p. 42 ). Bhoja is said to have read the

word q(=qf,o. in rhis grammar, Sararvatdkap;hdbhara$a (.Zide

Gaparatnamahodadhi, I 28 1. ,, .;,,;r :r,. i -, ' ' l

The author of the Yoga*iltra

The foregoing consideration shows that rrye" can safely take

the word q(5ifo as the name of 'a

golra. Sdme, may be

inclined to take the rvord tt(q-dfo as derived from Tesqs

in the grammatical sense of an apatla or gotra. ( The absence

of ark1|a in the word q(=q[o is not irrcgular, it being a

dm ). There appears to be no difficulty if we take qacsfo,

TI(euTfo and q(silfd as the three independent gorrc names.

Since a golraname is sometimes found to be derived from othernames ( cp. Bharadvaja and Bharadvdja ), it may be surmised

that the Patafrjali gotra came into existence after the Patafljalagotra.s

Since the name Pataijali is not found in the lists of eight

or sixty-four gotrat, which seem to be older than these of the

other gotras andsince there is no mention a or teacher of the

name of Patafrjali in the Vedic works or in the Mahdbhdrataor in the older Pur.rqas it may be rightly inferred that this g0rr4

came into existence in comparatively later a.ge.Fancdul dtioati.on oJ the word Potafr,jali

Though the word Patafrjali appears to belong to the r-udlnclass of rvords having no meaning of its component parts, yet

the grammarians of the later age are found to derive the word

from the two words, namely patat or gatital ( from the root pat,

3, It is to be noted that some scholars wrongly read q(llctro in

Br. Up. 3.7 ( N. Bhasacarya : The Age ofPataijali,P. I ).

Max Miiller is wrons while he reads islc4 ttTd5qo in the

{rsaf t4ono*q ( 14.5.5.1 ) (S.S. I .P. p. a02) ; i t must be

corrected to {d=?o (Vide also the Br. Up. 3.3.1 and 3.7.1

of the Kanva recension.

4. rTe=ilFoFqFe req aTaU:, cdF( (q qorURu{i: ( rere on

rfrn+1gif 6.1.9+ ). tnr;d: aFqilIT: {Rcr{ iq€{r{aqfq trerrirslFo: ( ate* on fearetto, 79 ). s-dd{FofqFe g lfb:cFeil ifil FrQ rgwte{rftiilqsqril ais Frrrelq E6sqqer-dlt gi<ttfqaErq Er cqslq srg: ( rr-"|tro on frar;adtn

{ : t

8i'

88 An Introduction to the yog$ntra

to fall ) and afijali ( the open hands placed side by side )s ;nmore than one sense. A criticial consideration of these deriva.tions would rcveal that the purpose of deriving the word inthis way is nothing but to glorify the sage. These derivationsar€connected with certain incidents ( concerning the lifeof thesage ), norrc of which appears to have any historical basis. Thefancifulness of these derivations is evident from the mvthicalcltaracter of these incidents.

There is a strong grotrnd to hold that all these derivationsare uruound. Those, who want to derive the name patafrjali

by joining the trvo parts patat ar,fl aitjali, take the help ofpararirpa ( regressive assimilation ) ( oidc the comm. on Sid. Kau.79 for a detailed account ol' the process ). Now, the operationcalled pararitpa can be applied if the word patafljaii is read inthe Sakandhvddi group; for pararnpa is sanctioned bv the

79r. ftq arsdfodfeq'q ruwrriestfEf( fu6:...rtfan a{5q*:rdf{k fal6Fa ( arora}o on fqgrrnmto z9 ). ctilorq=frfof€4 qassfs: €fs: \ inrslFitr sTtdqr6al$t, $arf<quT,645; ed. by Pt. Y. M;marhsaka ). Thus the wor,d patafljaliis founci to have been derived in three different senses : ( i )one who has fallen from the palm; ( ii ) one to whom thepalm is folded; and ( iii ) one whose palm has lallen.VardhamEna, the author of the Ganaratni,.mahodadhi, show-ed a peculiar derivation I Ta=alofrfa qa'irtrfs ( v.l. rdlu<-

alle ) r<eefal r areqs hwaarq dsT{r4 {6rii (v.1. ?ftr{:)( l.2B ). For a fuller grammatical discussion on the forma-tion o[ the word Patafljali, see the comm. L,aksmi on theSiddhantakaumudi on s,itra 1.1.64 ( aTqls;eqrft fa ).

5. Scholars should note that afijati does not primarily mean.theopen hands placed side by side and slightly hollowed (as ifby a beggar to receive food;' (Sans. Eng, Dic. by Sir Monier-Williams, p. !l ), for according to Sabara there is no hollow

- .in an afijali (Q€reda)rrlssqFot, {r 6qrrlu: ilttq *a'ct:,l.{.3-o ).

- . , + i , . _ -, , {

The author of the Yoga.sfitrr 89

'virttika 'sakandhvadigu ca, ( on Pdnini 6.1.94 ). It is remarkable to note that the word Patafrjali is not read in this groupeither in the Mahdbhdsya, or in the K#ika or in the coslrl€o-taries on these two works. This positively showr that the namePatafrjali does not deserve to be derived in the aforesaid processof pararfila and consequently we are to accept that the derivationis fanciful. Though the word is read in this group by laterg-rammarians, narnely Ramacandra ( Prakriy5kaumudi 6. l.g4 ),N:irdyanabhatta (Prakriy6sarvasva, prrtI, p 43), Bhaffoji (wronglyspelt by some modern scholars as Bha,-toji ) Drksita ( Siddhan-takaumudi, sir. 79) yet on a matter like the inclusion of a wordin a particular gdna ( group ) the view of teachers appearing inor after the l4th century cannot be accepted bliudly especiallywhen there is ample reason for doubt. Moderrr scholars havesimply followed the views of traditional scholars.6

Since the aforesaid derivations are proved to be false, thelegends connected with these derivations cannot be taken aspossessing any historical value.

6. "ln KatyEyana's vdrttika we get the name patafljali whichwas explained by later commenta(or$ as gtf;6t alsdq4!

aftrrl ( for whom the hands are fdlded as a mark of

leverence)" (Dr . S N. Dasgupta, H. i . p . , I . , p . 230 ) ;aide siqqqsiq il t{b6re by Udayavira Sestrin f p. 516 )and si<a<ain ei| Ql6q1fe6 cl.s(r by Dr. AdyaprasadaMi$ra (p. 182 ) for a similar view. Dr. Ady-praseda com-mits a blunder while he says that the Upakadi group ofPd,dni (2. +.69 ) contains the word patafrjali, for peninian

grammarians read qa=io (ano nor q(=cfb) in this group( aide the Ke$ike and other comrnentaries ).

2THB I\{YTHICAL LIFE OF PATANiLI

It is remarkable to note that there is no mention of ateacher named Patafrjali either in Vedic literature, or in theMahEbharata or in the older purdfas. The Bhagavata, whichdoes not belong to the older group of the pur6nas, mentionsPatafljali in its list of the siddhas. The expression ,rsurih sa-Patafljalih' ( 6. 15. 14 ) undoubtedly shows that this patanjafiis the same as the author of the yS.r The Saura-p. also speaksof a P6tafrjala yogadEstra ( 40.25 ), and a similar reference tothe YP. by Patafljali is found in the Skanda-p. ( Setumdhdtmya_33.8 ), both of which belong to a later period, It is unfortunatethat the relevant passages in these purd4as say nothing aboutthe life of this sage.

A mythical account of the life of the yogin patafrjali isfound in the Qidamla-ra_--slAh4lfny4, which, as I am informed,rs a seetion of the \$!ald+:p. of the southern recension. It isstated here that Adirigga {r3eFa, the_l_o:!_ ,l t!,", lelpeJ,ts) with adesire to

K A D

&llgoq the aftjati (p4lm) 9f a_ne and for this act of fal l ina nn_ol

the palm he came to beknown as patajiiali.l( qala cdgfo (fcqrfE*q) q)fsrrrcqrqt ilTgoqt q'lqflarfEfqsTcae'An olrrgrqrfs8{ti63{trq+ur at={o} cdq qdccFenrr;rr a{"dttrTd iqsrqt-rrlQtilt $Tqe, dfr{qn;qqpi*r by fqrgqqk6'fogq1f, p. aaS ).

A story, similar in nature but differing in details, is alsofound in the desa-Sesi-sarhvdda of the Skanda-purdria, quoted

l. The Bhdgavata contains another list of yo ins in 9.rt,57.58which does not mention Fatafrjali, though it contains the-names ot Kapila and Asuri.

t ing

The .inythicalrlife of Patafljali "91

in the Vydsatd,tparyanirnaya (pp. 3B-lO.;z These stories seem to,

have been'invented' with a view to justitving the derivation of

the word Patairjali, as shown in the previous section.

As we do not hold the identity of the grammarian Patafljali

with the authoi o[ the YS, we do not ascribe the parentage, etc.of the grammarian Patar'rjali (as done by modern scholars,

which still remains an open question) to the yogin Patafijali.

The most striking factor in the life of Patafrjali--the

grammarian as well as the yogin-.is his connectiontvith nAgas or

sarpas. We have already seen that in the aforesaid account of

the Oidambaramahatmya Pataf,jali was calted Adi$esa. TheNarasir-hha-p. (9. 7) uses the word BiSadhara as the name of theauthor of the YP.a The word Ahipati was used by Cakraplni(at the beginning of his commentary on the Caraka-sarirhit-a)and the word Phanibhrt by Bhoja ( in the fourth benedictory

2. The following verses of the Sesa-$esi-sarirvEda are worthnoticing. "qqortqq faaq' al (i... ,Tf" and his wife) aXoaetfttq r s<El iat aqh trq: s}sFq ?s: 6crlcfq! I itEr sTrrqqrqqrol osqqqrsqrfiqil: | (iq$qr: (;TriTEarqr €se]s{€idr6{r5so} | s{tFr{ot[s04s{ gt st(si qToFfqqq I feo'lEqq€sr rrldl iarqg=irq uqtA* | cd=cfoqqT€qT{q dEIdecrcTq grs tl

3. The verse of the Narasirirha-p. ( favefl.... ) quoted by

Jivagosvamin in his Param6tmasandarbha (sec.6l) is notfound in tbe Gita Press edition of the PurJna, though theverse is in consonance with the subject described in thischapter. The reference has been given by the editor (Bombayedition of 19l t) who seems to have used a different editionof this Purd.pa. About the number of verses in the Nara-sirirha-p. the remarks of Narasirhha Vdjapeyin are worthnoticing : CfgArt1fq€€q arcarEsrgf€rii€rrT q{fq q}qouqt,

f+flaq .filstrrTtir g{lcft cfilrld ( Nityacaraprad,pa.Vol.I, p. lB, B. l . ed. )

'92 An Introductim to the Yogasiltra

verse of his commentary on the Yogasrrtra ). The word Bhujag6-

dhr$a has been used in Tantralo'ka 28.285.

It is interesting to note in this connection that according to

the Visnudharmottsra (III. 73.48 ) the image of the Pataf,iala

YogasEstra should be of the form of Ananta (the king of snaker)

and that of the Sarhkhya of the form of Kapilamuni. This

clearly shows that long before the time of the composition of the

Visr.rudharmottara (which is generally assigned to 500'600 A. D.

Vide t. V. Kane : H, S. P., p. ?0 ) the author of the Yogastrtra

was considered to be the same as an incarnation of the lord of

snakes. In the later Yogic tradition a highly exalted place has

been given to Ananta. A Yogin is required to borv down to

Ananta, the lord of snakes, before taking up his daily exerciser

{,Ananlam fiapa'rcd dealm n-ageiam pl'thasiddhard, quoted inJyotsnd

on H. Y. Pradipika 2.84). The first benedictory verse of the

Vyrsabhasya (which evidently is an interpolation,)4 contairts'a salutation tothe god Ahi6a possessing a hood with many

mouths. All these positively thow that the connection of Patafrjali

with snakes has an age'old tradition behind it.

Owing to the non-mention of Patanjali in the legends

concerning nagas or sarpas as found in Itihlsa'Purdna literature,

we are constrained to think that the aforesaid mythical character

of Patafijali must have its basis on some misconception or wrong

identification. There is a striking PurS4ic evidence to support

our surmise. We 6nd in the PuraBas that one of the twenty - six

principal zdgas, which are depicted as snakes, is called Patanjali

(Matsyapurdpa 6.38-44; Liirgapurlna L.63.37; Padmapurd'ra

5.6.70-73). We understand that it is this similarity of name that

gave rise to all those legends that depicted the sage Patafrjali

as an incarnation of Se.a (or as a form of the lord of the snakes)

lvho was regarded as a great yogin in the Purdlras. etc' The

4. The benedictory verse 4tt4t"?I.... actually belongsto the

commentary by one Sar'rkaia on the Mat abtrarya; vidc

Paribhdgdvrtti, Appendix I, p. 120, published by the

Barendra Research Museum, Rajshahi, Bengal ( now in

Bangladesh ).

The rnythiml lifc of Patafljali 9:lr

name Kapila read in these lists with Patafljali strengrhens the.notion that this PatSfljali must be a yogin, who firltows Sarhkhyametaphysics in his treatment of yoga. As Patafrjali was credited.with the authorship ofcertain works, the author of each of theseworks carne to be, regarded ( by thc teachers of, hter ages )-as anincarnation of Se;a-na-ga

Two mgre reasons may also be conceived to account forPatafljali's connection with snakes, namely (i) patafijali's havinga second name signifying a snake and (ii) Patafljali's being bornunder the A$lega asterism, whose superintending deity is the snake.

Wemust accept our inability to decide finally the histori-eal conneetion of PataRjali wittr the snake king. since the teachersof later ages were not particular about the historical life of,ancient sagesr they simply stated what they had heard from suchpersons as were trustworthy to them without trying to corrobo.-rate the incidents known from these persons with other sourcei.

, . ' . , , ; . , , , - , , i l i ' : t l t ' r , i i : ' . i ' r '

3IDENTITY OF THE YOGIN PATAfiJALI, WITH THE

AUTHOR OF THE MAIIABHASYA.AN UNFOUNDED VIEW

Theidentity oftheauthor of the YS. withPatafl jali, the

author of the Mahlbha;ya (MB.) is accepted by a host of scbo-

lars on yoga, vyEkaranl and [yurveda' It is further stated by

.these scholars that either one and the eame Patafijali or the three

incarnations of the deity Ananta ( the king of snakes ) composed

works on yoga, vydkarana and dyurveda' We, however, do not

subscribe to this view.

Those, who take the authors of the YS. and the MB' as

ideotical, rely upon the following factors: (i) There is nothing

in the MB. tbat can warrant a person in holding that the two

Patafljalis are not identical; (ii) the author of the MB. knows

mgst of the important points of SErirkhyayoga metaphysics; (iii)

the MB. agrees with the Yoga view as regards tbe spholaoada

which is not held in comrnon by any other school of Indian

philosophy; (iv) both of the authors begin their r't'orks in a'similar manner (oi 'dc S. N. Dasgupta: II. I. P.,p.232).

B:foro trying to refute these arguments we want to inform

our reader s that we find no harm if th e identity of the gramma'

rian Patafljali and the yogin Patarjali is proved undoubtedly'

We simply assert that the aforesaid arguments are incapable of

proving th: identity of these two teachers-

The first argument seems to be based on the principle thal'the absence of holding opposite vierrys is a sign of identity of the

authors.' An argument of this kfnd may be valid on some parti-

cular cares provided both the teachers dea I with the same subject'

Asthesubjects of the YS. and the MB. are different in character,

the non - montion of opposite views cannot be taken as a sign of

identity of their authors. One can easily observe tbat the author

Identity of the yogin patafljali, _ 95

of the MB. had hardly any occarion to launch a criticitm againstany of the distinctivc views of tbe yS. It is true that the MB.contains a few of yoga views but they are of a very generalcharacter. The casual referring to these yoga views cannot be'taken as a sign to prove the identity of the authort. ft cannotbe denied that the MB, speaks of such vicws on draaln, guga,etc. as are found to be identical with the views held by theY8. But since a grammarian is at liberty to take the help of

.any view in order to serve his prrpose, this identity of viewscan hardly prove the identity of the two authors.

second argument shows nothing but versatility of theauthor of the MB. This has no beuring on the question ofidentity of the two authors. The influencu'of ,h" Sa,,khya-yogapbilosopby was !o vast that the acquiring of a sound knowled-geof serirkhyayoga metaphysics was onu of the easier acts withancient teachers. The possessing of deep knowledge ofone ormo"" Sart"a, cannot be taken as a mark for deciding the questionof identity ofauthors.

'Ibe third argument, which apparentlv looks so forceful, is not'worth anything. It is remarkable to note that the tiny and most.expressive word sphota has not been used in yS. B.'lZ, nor J

the elaborate Bhasya thereon. Had the spholo doctrine ofgrammarians been accepted .by yogins, the worj sphogl (_or anequivalent of it ) must have been used in- the inugyuon YS. 3. 17 dealing with iabda, etc. in a detailed

il3r"j;.#T:" ::,j[ :i'Til'T,];T' :il:'ffiJI;and pratyala ( presented idea / and about the retation" thaiexists between iabda and, artha. This yogic view is in strictconsonance with the nature of the gtfas, the mind, the organspeech, etc. as conceived by yogins. There is nothing tfrat

"anshow that the most subtle views of yogins have been accepted bythe grammarians also, for the goal, purpose, means uoa a"tnoiof o2akarapa are basically diffqrent.from those of adhJatmiiasUa.There is however no fault' in [olding that thq yoga v.iews

96 An Introduction to the Yogasntra

about spholaare to some extent similar to the views ot thegrammarians.l

The fourth argument has hardly anything to do with theidentity of the authon.s The similarity of the first propositionsin different works can in no way be taken ar showing identityof the authors. Any person may compore a work on yoga with

tbe fictijfldalkJa 'atha yogdnuid,sanam'. Moreover the word

cnASlsqnq does ngt seem to have been used in thete two works

in the same sense.s This shows that it is wrong to think of the

identity of the two auth<.lrs on the basis of the similaritv of the

first propositions. It is to be noted in passing that Medh6tithi

(on Manu l.l ) considered the sentence 'athainbdanu{asonun' as

composed by Pdnini and it is quite likely that the sentencc was.read by Patrini at the beginning of the Pratyahdra siltras.

As the author of the YS. has not followed an important.view of the aurhor of the MB. it may be surmised that these twoauthors were not identical. The YS. is found to uge the wordoncka in plural number in 4. 5, though the MB. asserts that

t. Safikara's refutation of the sphola doctine of grammarians( oida Sariraka-bhasya 1.3.28 ) proves that for the lollorryersof nirgupa.atmo-oidJii it is not neoeslrary to accept the doc.trine of tphuta of the vaiydkarapas. The Sarhkhya-sEtra( 5.57 ) also contains a refutation of the sphola doctrine.

2. We have a few workr ( on the same subject ) that havealmost identical passages at the beginning; cp. the first threeverses of the Api3ali3ikgdsotra with those of the Paninian.Sit garltm.

3. Cp. egfcsa;ilsergrrird fqistq rrq€siifa."(Uddyote onthe 6rst $ntenc€ of the Mahabhagya y; rgfrtTit TilgrrlrclcF{Tar c'Fqtsiife trrli rge. (T. Bod.); .rg{Knq\rrgqraq}fa*tq 1Bal. on S. Kau.524J. That the sense tq{r-atrrsf the root afg$1g ir vaild has been clearly sbown in the.Pademaiijari comm. on the Kel3iLe and in the Sabdakau-rtubha. Aauianne has not been ured in thir scnn in the YS.

Identity of the yogin Patafrjali

it is to be used in singular number only.a Though the differenceof this kind can never establish non-identity of the two authors,yet it may rightly be taken as a firct which strengthens the view

of non-identity.

Following two points are to be considered seriously in thisconnection ; ( i ) Since Patafljali is rhe name of a gotra, it isextremely difficult to say anything definitely about the identityof authors bearing this name, unless we find such qualifyingexpressions as help us differentiate one Patafljali from theorher. ( ii ) Those who hold that these two Patafrjalis areidentical belong to a much later period. In such a matter as

the identity of ancient authors possessing the same niime thevalidity of the opinions of teachers of much later age cannot be

taken blindly especially when we find no statement in earlierworks that substantiates their opinion.

4. qs qaaf,{ tlc sfl(cElcict€Tr?A uFa d1{tri qqF( | p*q ? aia-fqfe t f+qa €tJAlq ? arteaq ( M8.2.2.6). In this coffi€c-tion the view of Medhetithi is worth noticing ; .,qitt{lfO

qq$Ilt€r4 strtcaFisrrqraif qgEsri fv-<aq ,.. q{if rrqfoirrRcr - 3Tirffirfek fssqdtle qmss;r.cdtqFrlaglsRi

Erqrilqlq ( on Manu 5.158 ). It is well known that theqFU+fmtl is regarded as the same as the author of theMahabhdsya. Some however are inclined to take anaka inthe sense of akeaala ( ie. sa-sahala \i uide Mddhavtya-dhatu.v5tti 2.48. In the sirtrain question anekamuslmean bahu-Grammarians have tried hard to defend the plural numberin the word aneka.Most of them take resort to ekaleEa (uidcthe comm. on Sivagttir 2.26; the commentator is a disciple

of the grammarian Bhatroji Dikgita ). The sense of ckaAegadoer not however suit the purpose of YS. 4.5.

97

o

41MACINABY IDENTITY OF THE AUTHOR OF THE YS,

WITH THE AUTHOR OF CERTAIN MEDICAL TREAT'

ISES, OF ]HB PARAMARTHASARA AND OF SOME

OTHER WORKS

Some scholars are found to hold tha,t Patafljali, the author

of the YS., was also the author of a medical treatisel' The fifth

benedictory lrurr" ( slcEiETr{lsTlsqq"') in the Bhojavgtti on the

YS. and the fourth benedictory verse at the end of the Vivara+a

comm. ( alta flq(tq qail slsi"" ) are frequently quiited to

substantiate this view.

In the wellknown verse of Cakrap-atli 'qtagoq€1qlsq'

"" uQuail Tq:'( at the beginning of tl're Eyurveda-dtpik:i

comm. ) the expression cataka pratisathsk1ta is usualy explained

as referring to the Carakaoarhhitd composcd by Patafljali' In the

verse {Trfot q}q$R*"'- ' '" 'qqfEs qlgq in the Patafrjali '

carita of Ramabhadradikqita, the word Vdrttika ls said to

suggest that certain senteuces were originally composed by

Patafrjali (T'he existence of these vSrttikas has been admirablv

shown by Vijayaraksita in his Madhukoda, p' 33. ) ' Pataijr ' l i 's

connection with the caraka-sarhhitl is said to have been con'

l. Regarding the character of this work scholars are found to

hold divergent views. Some think that Patafljali incorpora'

ted a l'ew.2ogas in the body of the Caraka'sarhhita (oidc

the Krsnacarita of Samudragupta). Others are of the opinion

that Patafljali cornposed a work of the nature ofa vlrttika

in the Carakasarirhita. Some hold that Patafljali was a

redactor(prat i 'sa i rkar l l )o t . theCarakasar i rh i ta .Theauth.

orship of a few medical treatises is also ascribed to a certain

Pataf,jali, who evidently seems to be a perrcn of l'ater age'

Imaginary identity of the author of the YS. 99

firmed by N6geda ( "p.

qfa ql* qaaqflo!, Laghumafij6s6,p. 9, ed. by Pt. Sabh5pati Upddhyayaj ,z

Whatever may be the nature of Patafijalits con$ibutionto the medical sciene, there is nothing ( except the similarity inthe names ) to support the vier,v that the phlrsician Patafrjali is

identical with the yogin PaF.fljali. As none of the teachers.who hold that the yogin Patafijali is the aurhor of a medicaltreatise, belongs to a date prior to the 9th century, their opinionaborrt the iCentity of ancient teachers bearing the same godra

name carries no weight, especially when the works composed bythese teachi:rs do not bear any sign that points to their identity.It is needless to say tilat the works like the Patafrjalicarita are oflittle historical value.

The identity of the author of the YS. with patafljali, theauthor of the FaramirthasSra seems to be based on the similarityin name only. It appears that since the author of this work issaid to bt: a certain lldhara ( verse B /, or Se.a jagadadhdra

(verse 87) (i e. Se;a, the Serpent king, who sustains the world ),the work was consiCered to be a composition of Patafrjali, whowas also regarded as the incarnation ot sesan6ga. Leaving thisrernote similarity ir the names of the authors, there is nothingin the work thnt can be taken as e'idence proving the identitvof the two Patefijaris. No expression in the paramrrthasara

bears any close similarity with the expressions in the yogasfrtra.

It is interesting to note that the conamentator RSghavrnanda

2. Pt Hemarhja sarman considers Nrgesa's ascription of thispassage to Caraka wrong (+;trc{;Q(-, gc'lqqT( pp. B7-BB ),for in the Carakasarirhit6 there is no such statementas has been quoted by Nage3a" We however take thepassageas based on Carakasarhhita- SEtrasthdna ll. lg,lg( <vt*mcai """3lsiq ilisft(r{T: ). T'he Manjusd passage(tqfffialrEf,c ET;Eqlet€l undoubtedly proves our assertion.The word iti. does not necessarily suggest that the

sentence has been quoted verbatim.

100 An In'roduction to the Yogasiltra

did not quote any strtra of the YS. in his commentary on the

Param6rthas-ara, though there were many occasions to do so'

This strict silence tends to show that Rdghavdnanda was not in

favour of holding identity ofthese two authors'

That besides these Patafrjalls there were other Patafljalis

also is well known. As for example Lakgmldhara, in his comm.

gp Saundaryalahari 11, quotes the sentence (q1[g66ri S€I(:

qqF?g6(: and ascribes it to one Pataajali with the honori8c

titlebhogaoui. The sentence is on the cakras. Though the system

of the cakras is not contrary to the views propounded in the YS'

( in spite of their being not expressly stated in the YS ),3 y"t

there are no grounds to take the above statement as a saying

of the author of the YS.

The Yuktidipika, a comm. on the Sdmkhyakarika, contains

a few sentences of one Patafljali. As the drift of all these

sentences is not quite clear to us, we refrain from holding a

discussion on the connection of this Patafljali with the author

of the YS.*

r27312J

3. Through a long practice of prlpdyama as described in the YS.

one becomes able to realize the eakrat. Since the means

are chiefly described in the YS. anything realized through

these means must be regarded as in consonance with the

views of the YS. provided there is nothing to disprove it

4. Modern scholars are of the opinion that Patalljali, whose views

have been quoted in the Yuktidipike, is different from tbe

author of the YS; uide P. B. Chakrabarty: Origin and

Development of Samkhya System of Thought, p. 134; Pt

Udayavtra $astrin: stt4ssiq sr Ef(€t€r pp.622-625, ed.

l9?9; Dr. r{dydprasada tuIi3ra e siqEsiq t't tlaqrRtrTlrtnr p. lB3.

5A VERSE OF THE VAIiYAPADIYA ON THE IDENTITY

OF THREE PATA{JALIS

The Vdkyapad;ya ( 1.t47 ) reads :

srqqF(tiafsqql + qoTi sqErfts{t: t

fsftreswsurlgqnqsrlt*dlqi frqaar rr

The verse says that there are three kinds of blemishes

pertaining to the body, speech and mind and that their purifi-

cation is done by three Sdstras on ciki,tsd ( medicine ), on lakEa1o

i.e. olldkarapa ( grammar ) and on adh16tr1no ( i. e, the science of

self or yoga prescribing means for realizing 6tman). It is suffici'

ently cl€ar that this verse does not mention the name of any

Iiterary composition, nor does it allude in any way to any author

-teacher of these three idsrras. The verse simply shows the

purpose of these three iaslros, which may be stated as kayma-

Iaiuddhi, (purpose of cakitsaiasha), od.hmalaluddhi (purpose of

lakEapaiastra) and buddhi'-mala-luddhi (purpose of adhlatma'

iasha).

While commenting on Vak.-p. 2.485 Punyar6ja remarks

that this verse eulogizes the author of the Mahabha.sya (etti

E[6rao] st4qFlgfafsqqt qtqrFeso]tc qrcq$T(cais]{il).

These remarks of Punyar-aja do not seem to be at all justified

as the verse says nothing on authorship of any kind. It is

wrong to think that a statement showing the praiseworthy

function of a lastro necessarily praises a particular teacher

who has composed a treatise (however praise-worthy it may be)

on that lastra. Thus it follows that there must be a good reason

for giving rise to such a highly wrong notion as shown above.

According to us this reason is the firmly established

notion of identity of the three Patafljalis composing three

102 An Iniloduction to the YogasEtra

treatises. on the aforesaid three .iartrar. We mean to say that

as PuByardja was highly influenced by the pre'existent view of

the identity of the three Patafrjalis he thought 11t21 sinss this

verse spoke of only those three iastras that were associated with

Patanjali, the verse deserved to be taken as containing an

eulogy of Patafljali, the author of the MahebhFBya, a work

on grammar.

It is needless to say that this stat€ment of Puqyardja

served as a strong ground for strengthening the notion of

identity of the three Patafljalis conrposing works on the afore-

said three iastras. PunyarS.ja belonged to the 10th century

or to an earlier period. As Punyardja's statement strengthened

the belief of the identity (as shown above), scholars of later

ages accepted this identity without any hesitation. That is

why we find Bhoja (l l th century), Cakrapani (l l th century)

and Sarikara, the author of the Vivarana comm. (c. l0th century)

to speak of this identity in the clearest.terrns.

It appoarc that this wrong notion of identity is not very

old and that it is based oa rrothing but the similarity in names.

The mention of otrly three izsfrai, narnely cikitsa, Iak;ara

and adhlanna in the aforesaid verse of the Vnkyapadiya cannot

be taken as a sign to prove that one and the same Patafljali

was associated with the authorship of three treatises on these

three iaslrar, for the purpose of the verse in question is not tospeak on the three -(astras, but on the purification (aifuddhi) ofthree kinds of blemishes (nalas). The verse rneans to say that

every sentient being hac three aspects, namely &axc (body),

uac (speech) and buddhi (cognitive faculty), which are defiled by

impurities. Bhartrhari spoke of this threefold division of blemishes

as it was one of the most wellknown doctrines in tradition.Thus it is quite clear that the statement of Bbartrhari hasnothing to do with the identity of authors of the three treatiseson cikitsa,ldkvtza and adh2ama.

6

IDET\ITITY OT PATAffiJALI WHOSE STATDMEI{T ONDRAVYA HAS BEEN QUOTED II{ THE

VYASABHA$YA

The Vyasabhagya ( 3.44 ) has quoted a statement of a

certain Patafljali on the nature oI drarya ( substance ) in the

sentence aTg(Irsar?rll4tElnw: Ygq) aaufufe cacfe:. whetherthis Patafljali is the same as the author of the YS. is going to

be discussed here.

Some scholars expressly deny tbe identity of these two

Patafrjalis. As for example, Pt. Udayavlra Sdstrin clearly

asserts that this statement cannot belong to the author of the

YS, as it is not stated in the YS. He further remarks that it

may be a statement of Patafljali, the author of the Mah6bha;ya;

or it may, most probably, belong to that Patafrjali whose views

have been quoted in the Yuktidipika comm. ( Sedlkhyadar6ana

ka ltihesa, p. 625, 2nd ed, ). Dr. Adyaprasdda also seems to

hold the same view on the basis that the statement is not found

in the YS. ( SarirkhyadarSana ki Aitihdsika Parampar6, p. lB7 ).He also opines that the authorship of this sentense is to be

ascribed to the Salilkhya teacher Patanjali ( p. lB8 ) who is

different from the author of the YS. ( p. lB7 ). We howerrer

do not subscribe to none of these views.

It is true that the word draula is absent in the YS. But

it would be an unphilosophical way of thinking if this absence

is taken to prove that the idea expressed by the word, draa2a is

not accepted by the author of the YS.1

l. The VyEabhegya however uses the word, d,rdolta frequently iFarr{ in 2.33,3.44, 3.47 r 3.52; t6q6i in 4.12; aaqAq in

4.12; aarr{ fr{ ' tqT in J.13; raqtq in 3.13; Eaqtsl tq in 2.30;

F6rfFd{(i in 3.13 and ?aqr;qsfta{ in 3.13.

104 An Introduction to the Yogastrtra

The aforesaid sentence oa draal)a says that it is a kind of

samfiha or samudd)a ( aggregate). It is well known that the idea

of aggregate is in pe.rfect accordance with the view-point of the

YS. The strtra tftor$+tarq s(g(wq ( 4.14. ) cannot be under.stood if the idea of aggregate is not accepted. The word artic( 1.{3 ) dharmin (3.1+ ) and, aastu ( 4.15,t6 ) must be acceptedas denoting a somilha.

As the YS. accepts the doctrine of the three gwpas andtheir creating moditications jointly, the view of the collocation ofthe component parts must be taken as in accord with the YS.z

It appears to me that in the Patafjala school, ( i. e. in theparticular tradition to wtrich Patafljali belonged) the word draala

was coined for the aggrrrgate defined as qgf,f{Al4q4tEqq(.

There are other kinds of aggregates (Vide Bhasya on this siltra)which were not named draaya in the school to which patafrjali

belonged, These aggregates ( e. g. a forest ) no doubt fallunder dharmi,n ot uastu ot artha, for they are of the nature ofgtql?r7fa+SliCT l Bhasya 1.7 ) or to be more precise they are

of the nature of {r;e}fEaFartr+u,rtgnteq ( YS. 3.14 ).

Since a knowledge of fuat1ta is helpful in comprehendingthe character of the saaritpa form of the bltiltas, the author ofthe BhEsya recalled Patafljali's view about draaya. That theword, draolta, tbough not used in the YS., was known to theschool to which Patafljali belonged, is proved by the word atrain the rolevant Bha$ya passage.

2. Since {fg€I4 or iT{d may be of two kinds and only onekind, of sam1ia is to be accepted as ,dravya,, the Bhagyaklrathought it necessary to state clearly what type of samfrha wasaccepted ( in the Yoga school ) as ,dravya'. This appearsto be the reason for quoting the view of (a certain) patafljalion the idea of samfrIw,

Identity of Patafijali quotetl in the Vyisabhrqya 105

The form in which the sentence is read in the Vyagabhagya

( i. e. the use of ili before the name of the teacher ) shows that

it is an actual statement of Patafljali. It can reasonably be

surmised that the statement was spoken at the time of teaching

his disciples. Such oral statements of ancient teachers were

preserved in the tradition ( on account of their authoritativeness

as well as usefulness I and they were quoted by later exPonents

or commentators with a view to justifying or elucidating the

views of their respective 6rstras.

As to why Patafljali did not incorporate this useful state'

ment in his YS., we reply that it is due to a peculiar custom

concerning literary composition' We mean to say that our

ancient teachers were not interested in revising their literary

compositions. As the teaching of all idstras ( and especially

of mok$atastra ) was strictly under the direct guidance of gurus'

there arose no necessity to add afterwards these useful sentences

in the body of the texts- That is why sometimes most important

iasrric views are not found in the works ( mostly in strtras ) of

the original teachers. These are often found in the works of

later exponents or commentators' As without tbese views the

statenents of the original teachers remain partly unintelligible

it is reasonable to conclude that these views mugt have been

propounded by the original teachers' Since the views are not

found in the works of these teachers, they must be taken as

'oral teachings', which are preserved in tradition'

That our assertion, namely ,our ancient teachers had little

interest in revising their compositions' is not baseless can be

proved by the Mah6bhdsya passage q tsrElq qrslqi: qrrfqr

ftst fcsdqfid (Paspada dhnika and also 6.3.3+,8.2.6)' Though

this passage shows the reason for not crossing out rules after

being framed, yet it can be equally applied to the act of not

including a rule in a text after its final composition'

We may also suppose that Patafljali composed a vrtti on

his YS. and the sentence 'tgaleAnua"" belonged to this vrtti'

The composition of vrttis by the s-utraklrras is an well.established

106 An Introduction to the Yogasr.rtra

fact in the literary history of ancient India.s

In this connection a conjecture may be hazarded

that a certain person of the Patairjali gotra, who was

a follower of the YP", composed a work on the YS'

which contained the aforesaid sentence and the author

of the Bhagya quoted this sentence from this work' His'

torically it is not impossible that two persons of the Patafljali

gotra, both belonging 1e the same school of yoga, composed

* o . k , o o y o g u , A s a n i n d i v i d u a l t h e s e c o n d P a t a n j a l i i s d i f f e .

rent from the first, but so far as the mental field is concerned

he cannot be regarded as distinct from the other'

To say that Patafljali, the author of the abovenoted state'

ment, is identical with the author of the MB. is highly doubtful'

Though the Mahdbh6;ya says gqqS<FI] Earlq ( 4'l'3')' a state'

men twh ich i s i npe r fec tha rmonyw i th thesd r i r khyayogav iew

( cp. Kaiyafa's explanation sqfiEqk]writzq ), yet this cannot

be taken as a proof showing identity of these two teachers, for

thfi $ame Mahabh-asya speaks of such views oa drao2a as are in

accordance with the Nyayavai3egika philosophy "p;

ft g<fari

* gcr: ? slaE*qsfqq{,qq?qT goil:, $*s;qq aaqq ( 5'l ' l l9 ) in

whtn tn" Nydya view that a draola is different from the aggre'

gate of its attributes has been propounded' It is well known that

the srammarians are allowed to take the help of any philosophi'

cal iiew that serves his PurPose.

3. Since a vrtti is defined ao a qatuit{r< q;q ( an exposition

whose chief business is to unfold the imports of the words

in the strtras ) it is quite natural for a strtrakara to compose

a vrtti on his siltra'work, for the imports of sitras are not

easiiy intelligible. It is however a presumption only to say

that Patafljali actually composed a vrtti on the YS. though

such a presumption is not against the literary tradition

of ancient India.

CHAPTER

IV

DATE OF TFIE YOGASU?RA

IFACTORS THAT DETERMINE THEDATE OF

THE YOGASUTRA

Before taking the task of assaying the arguments advanced

by modern scholars to ascertain the date of the YS. we want

to state that a large number of exprersions in the YS' have

been taken verbatim by Patarljali from the works of his prede-

cessors. We frankly admit that there is nothing in the YS.

that helps us determine its date with a considerable amount

of precision. We can simply point to some factors that enable

us to escertain approximately the upper and lower limits of

the composition of the YS.

Since the modern method of ascribing dates to the inci-

dentt and person! of ancicnt India was conceived by western

scholars, who were not PrePared to admit hlgh antiquity of

ancient Indian civilization, it is quite logical to take the dates

of most ancient thinkers 6xed by these scholars as 'doubtful'

or 'not-proved'. On the other hand we frankly accept that

almost all of our ancient authors wcre not interested in such

historical matters as the date. birth, place, etc. even of their

great personalities. Whatever was heard by these authors

(wrnaq) was usually accepted as'a fact' and nobody thought

it necessary to corroborate these facts with such sources ar ha e

connection with them.

The following factors may be considercd for ascertaining

the date of the YS. approximately.

fA) The YS. does not seem to havo any .artificial'name

given by its author. Onc can easily understand that the wordc

logasfttra or lngadariana are not the actual names giwn by itsauthor but are descriptive names given by its readerg in orderto refo! to the composition distinctly. This absence of ani8

I l0 An Introduction to the Yogas[tra

cial name shows that the yS, belongs to a period when thecustom of giving 'artificial' names to literary compositions didnot arise.r

(B) The author of the YS. !s known by his gotrd n me.This shows that the YS. was composed when teachers were

known by their gotra names only ( gotra is to be taken in its

Dharama'Etra sense ).

(C) We find that the authorship of the YS. has not been

ascribed to any divine or semi..divine being. This shows that

it Was composed when the tendency to ascribe literary compo-

sitions to non-human beings was not in vogue. According to

us the aforesaid tendency aroge in later times when the authors

of the works on adhydtrnaoidltd came to be regarded not asApapurutas ( i. e. persons possessing direct experience of super-sensuous entities and possessing the power to communicate theirthoughts to their disciples so that they could be convinced

fully ) but as persons endowed with highly developed intelli-

gence only. These authors became compelled to speak of divine

authorship in order to make their diseiples believe that what

they taught or propounded was valid, since that had been

originalll' propounded by divine beings.

(D) The mention of hastibala ( the strength like that of an

eleptrant ) in YS. 3.24 as an illustration is, according to us, a_---.--

l. It may be said that an author of later times may compose

a rvork without giving an artifcial rume to his compositien.

While we do not deny the possibility of such naming we

want to state that such a work often exhibits such signs

as may point to its later origin. It cannot be coneceived

that Patafljali was an author of later age who composed

the Yogasirtra by imitating the ancient custom of naming

literary dompositions. The works ( in stttras ) by Panini.

Pirlgala, Jaimini, BEdarayaga, Gotama and others also

bear the same character. These works are known by more

tban one'name' evidently given by the disciples 1 $irya-"

pai*lord ) yitha view to referring to the works diitinctl!'.

Factors that determine the date of the Yogasiltra 1l I

sign that clearly points to the 'period' of its composition. Since

an illustration is chiefly given to enable the students 1 anttadsins,

lit. residing near the teachers ) to comprehend subtle matters,

it must be taken as pointing to the period in which the author

lived, provided it is not a natural phenomenon like fire, water,

air, etc. Thus it is reasonable to hold that the example of

hastibala undoubtedly shows that the YS. was compcsed whenthe custom of me:suring bodily strength ( especially of humanbeings ) on the basis of the unit of 'elephant-strength' was invogue or at least was not regarded as a matter of olden times.2( []asti,bala as a measure has been mentioned in many places inthe R6m5yarra and the Mahdbhhrata ).

C)ther examples given in the YS, namely a jem ( ma4i, ) 'in 1.4.1 and a peasant 1k;etrika )in 4.3 have no br.aring on thedate of its author,

(E) The antiquity of the YS. may be inferred from the useof the word akus,tdain 4.29 in the sense of ,devoid of cravingfor a thing which is blameworthy' { see chapter V ). It isremarkable that the word has not been used in the works of

2. It may be noted that as tl:e examples garuglabala and,aft2ubala ( both mentioned in the \tylsabhdsya ) are PuraBic

they must have been known to Patafljali ( There aresimilar other balas also ). Since Patafijali thought it moreuseful to mention hastibala ( which must be inferior toguruflabala and udyubala ) we suppose that he considered

this example more vivid and effective to his disciples. Had

the custom of using hasttn-measure ceased long beforePatafijali he would not have meniioned it but the balas

lilce garu{abcla wlrich are greater than hastibala. We takehastibala as a measure ( unit of $trength ) on the authorityof the Mahdtrharata and Ramayaga. As to the precise

character of this measure nothing can be said definitely.

Whether garu(abala etc. are to be taken in rhe s;lrne way or

they simply mean the strength of Garuda etc. is to bedecided on the basis of the authoritative texts.

I 12 Introduction to the YogasEtra

such ancient authors as Kalidesa, ASvaghoga, Bhasa, Bhartrhari

and others. It appearr that this word fell in disuse long before

the Christian era.

(F) Among the most ancient works that quote the YS'

w e m a y m e n t i o n t h e n a m e o f t h e l \ 4 d l h d r a v r t t i { i l d e v r t t i o n

Saokhyakarike2S ). This commentary must be one or two

centuries earlier than the Christian era, for it has been men'

tioned in the AnuyogadvEra'-sirtra of the Jainas ( sitra 4l )'

which cannot be assigned to a period later than the first

century A. D. This shows that the YS' must be assigned to a

period earlier than 500 B. C'

(G) Some of the Purdpas contain such passages as are

undoubtedly based on the sfrtras of the YS. ( see the appendix

for these verses ). Since most of these passages do not belong to

those Pur6nic chapters that deal with tlrtha, arata, ilana and other

similar things, they cannot be assigned to a later age. Moreover

some of these passages belong to ttre oldest group of the Purdnas.

This shows that we can safely place the YS. some centuries be.

fore christ. As it was the duty of the Purlnic authors to preach

the views of former teachers in a popular way, we take the

P u r S p a s a s b o r r o w e r s . I t i s q u i t e i l l o g i c a l t o t h i n k t h a t a n

ancient teacher (satrakara ) based his work on the Purdnic

prcsentation of a aidYd.

It cannot be presumed that the sourco of all of these

Purdpic passages is not the YS' but some works anterior to the

YS., for it wal not possible for the Pur5rlic authors to get them'

selves acuainted with these works' Though we do not deny that

the Purdnic authors may have come to know of the views of some

pr"-Puturiulian teachers indirectly ( i' e' though tbeir traditiorr)

yet the close similarity of tha Purdnic verses with the expressions

of ,fru yS. tends to show that most of them are based on the Y S'

(H) The Tripifaka passages bearing close similarity with

the expressions in the YS. seem to have heen taken frorn the

YS. It cannot be logically held that the author of a work like

thc YS. took Buddha's teachings as authoritative and incor'

I Factors that determine the date of the Yogasntra I ld

porated some of his views in his composition, for Buddha neitheraccepted the three gupas as the ultimate material cause of all( including vijfr,ana of Buddhism ) nor regarded uioekakhlati asthe highest means f Viuekakhyafi implies rhe existence of thepututa principle--the immutable entity whose existence has notbeen clearly accepted by Buddha). Thrrs we are to accept thatPatafrjali's views are bascfl ns1 on Buddha's teachings but onthe teachings of pre.Buddhist yogins.

On the contrary there are strong grounds that showBuddha's borrowing from the pre-existent yoga tradition. Theargument is : Buddha,s knowledge of a yogic ( i. e. super-$ensuous ) phenomenon must be accepted as borrowed if Buddhafails to explain the phenomenon ( by pointing to its causes, etc. )with the help of his own philosophical views. We find that thephenomenon of supernormal powers { oibhuli,s ) has been accept,ed by Buddha though his analysis of the mental field fails toexplain how these powers arise. This failure proves that Buddhacame to know of lhese powers from some pre-Buddhist source.Moreover Buddha's views 'f the entities rike auidla and the likeare unsound in many respects. This shows that Buddha did

lo-t possess the highest realization of these entities. Thus itlollows that he came to know of these entities from some pre.existent tradition of adhydtnaoid2d.

In the Tripitaka Buddha is found to hold ancient yoginsin high esteem and to declare his indebtedness to them. He isalso found to speak highly of the means like apramada and todeclare that these were practised by former yogins. All theseundoubtedly show that Buddha was taught traditional yoga loreby competent teachers-a fact which further points to Buddha,sborrowing from the pre.Buddhist teachings on yoga. Thus it isquite reasonable to hold that Buddha,s statements having closesimilarity with the siltras of the yS. are based on the yS.whether Buddha came to know of the views embodied in thesestatements not from the YS. but from sorne similar works cannotbe decided in the present state of our knowledge. As to thercason for Buddha's silence about the YS. or its author we shalldiscuss in the coming section.

Il4 An Introduction to the Yogasirtfa

(I) It is remarkable to note that no Vedic work m€ntions

a teacher Patafljali by narne. 'Ihe Mahdbherata, which contains

a great number of verses on yoga metaphysics and yoga practice,

is conspicu,rusly silent on Fataf,jali, thougir it mentions a consi-

derable number of sages who are said to be the teaciters of ,vogaor adhlaintaaidya or mokqaiaslra. To us this non'mention is

significant and we believe that t ire author of the YS, appeared

after the {inal composition of the lt{r.lr[bhlrata. About the

date o[ the composition of the M:lrl]rharata we do not sub-

scribe to tne views of modern schr:lars acd we do nct find any

fault in holding the view tirat "'iic -'\iahhbh-irata was fully

composed within a century a{'tei 11l: Bilalata wer, with the

remarks that (i) a srnall number of chapters were incorporated

alterwards by the scctarian auti lox's to glorify their sectarian

views anC that (ii) a consi<ji:rabic number of verses were

in terpolated hcrc anC thcre ior obvir . ;qs reasons. I t is needless

to say that the replr.cemeilt of trld or obsolete expressit-ns by

new ones is found ahnost evenylvhe t'e irr the Mahdbl,arata--a fact

which stands as an obstatcle in asceltaini:,g its i: igh antiquity.

(J) We have a ci!;t jcctu{e rl l la:i idllS P;tt.ri i jal i 's appearing

four to five ceniuries aft ',,r the BirI 'ata wr-r. \Ve irie of the opinion

that Fatafljali, the iiutilor of the YS., is the sarne person who

compored the lratairjala Eakhe of the Samaveda. Though there is

no evidence te prove this assumptiot yet rve tl i i irk that this identi-

f icadon cannot be brushed aside sr:Inurarily. The employment

of the epithet buddhinal to thesage Patairiali, wh,, is described

as the author of a iahha of the Sd.m:rverla (.ai,rie Vayu-p 61.63

and Brahmepda'p. I. 35.46; these Purir:ric chapters are on aeda'

lAkha-aibhaga) is a clear sign sho,virrg thal Pata-ijali rvas known

to the traditiol as tfue author of sorne ,,r'ork of ourstanding merit,

which must be other than the Vedic 3akha, for this epithet

serves no purposo if Patafrjali is creciited with the composition of

a Vedic 3ekhe. We are thus led to think that it is the composi.

tion of the YS. which is the c:ruse for employing the said

epithet to Patafljali. It is to be noted that the same epithet

given to the id,khdkdru Sat,otyu in the PurI ric chapters on

Factors that determine the date of the Yogasltra l15

oeda.idkha.oibhaga hat a definite reason for its use.3

There is feeble ground for holding that the yS. is directlybased on some Vedic recension. The Blhad.yogiy6jfravalkya(2.{3) describes tfuara in the same words as are found in yS.1.24 and remarks that it is a statement of a Sruti, As a similar

statement is not found in the available Vedic works, it may bepresumed that the word ,4ruti, refers to the patai,jala Sakha ofthe Sdmaveda. It should be noted in this connection that theYogas[tra lays rtress on the path of bhakti and the mutteringof prapaaa (om) as well; both of these have intimate connectionwith the samaveda. a fact which shows that there is no logicarfault in regarding the author ofa recension of the samaveda asthe author of the YS.

Purdnic chronology does not go against this conjecture,for the Pur-a'ic chapters on the division of the sdmaveda pracesPatafrjali in the 7th or gth place afrer Vedavydsa, who,according to the Pur6nas, lived at the time of the Bherah war.Since these Purdnic lists showing the lines of teachers are notstrictly accurate, we can reasonably conclude that patafijali ofthe Slmaveda lived three to five centuries after the Bhdrata war.

The factors mentioned to fix the approximate date of theYogasirtra do not go against this date. The custom of usinghastibald was found to be prevalent in the time of the Bhlrata warand it is quite likely that the custom was living even for a periodof three or four centuries after the Bharata war. After-wards the custom became extinct. lThe hastin measure (concern.ing lengtb) was however used in liter times as is proved by itsmention in the Artha3astra]. As physical str€ngth was graduallyfalling into decay, the .elephant unit' came to Ue looked uponas a thing of wonder or astonishment by the time of patafrjali.This seems to be the reason for mentioning it in the sltra.

3. The epithet buddhintat is given to Sakalya (Vayu p. 60.63),who is the author of the padapd$ha, a work that ghows thatits author possessed a sound analytical knowledge of theVedic language.

116 An Introduction to the Yogasiltra

The two factorso namely (l) the absence of any artifrcial

name given to the YS. by its author and (2) the non'ascription of

authorship to any non'hurnan being seem to us in perfect

consonance with this date of the YS' We think that the custom

of giving artificial names and of ascribing divine authorship

either did not arise at all or was not widely acceptcd at the

time when the YS. was comPosed'

It appears that after the devastating Bhdrata war, all

ancient uiJl,as .tood in a state of decay and consequently there

arose the acute problem of preservation (rakga) of lastras' The

sages of that tirne solved the problem by composing treatises

adopting a new pfocess of composirion i' e' by composing concise

sentenccs pregllant with meaning' 'l he sentences formed in

this way are known as sfitrds'4 The YS' is one of those works

that were composed in the sirtra style'

As the sages composed these sutra works with the chief

purpose of preserving ancient aidltds, these mainly contained

ttre esrential parts of the views propounded therein' In order

to preserve brevity important details were often left as a result

of which almost all views propoun'ded in these works seem to

be incomplete and to some extent faulty to modern readers' These

necessary factors, not stated by the sfrtrakdtas, are found to have

been stated by the later bha$Yakdras--a point which deserves to

4. That the siltra style was invented to serve the purpose of

propounding a number of views in the least possible words

is ctearly proved by its characteristic known as fnraolgc'

A sirtra disregards the principle of qt4trt4(t so that an

expression in a strtra may convey more than one sense or

Ourpor" as is stated in the Vivaraga commentary on the

Praiagartha (ettearM sr{afcf( t4lqtq qrF4fsqlrazrll

q qpqt{!, P. B2). See alsoNyayamafljari I (iI*f qcfrIqqt

qt fislir qt**s sl4td €c'{tqlfrt1i{qqgsqdqq t q€qTqltq

il e;iq qt BII?tqt sT (qd rriqll{qk qtftafrfe c qJc:

(sec. on l€Ivt P. 26).

Factors that determine the date of the Yogasita ll7

be carefully noted by modern scholars who are accustomed to

think that the view of a bhaSyakar4 must belong to him simply

because it is not stated by the siltrakara.

It seems quite justified to hold that as the authoritativeneslofthese newly cornposed works on ancient aidyas depended on

the personality of their authors (who were deemed as aptas bytheir followers) these works came to be called after the names(i. e. the g0tr4 names) of their authors. As for erample we maysay that our YS. was known in the school of Patafijali by the'name' of grn=qoi (taqtofleii) ulnqlq (u)ufava+ qsq)-a work on yoga 'composed' in the stttra style by Pataijali. It

is needless to say that the name is not artificial but descriptive.s

5. Unlike the artificial names the descriptivo names are not

fixed, i. e. there can be more than one descriptive name of

one and the same work and the same descriptive name mayrefer to more than one work. Moreover a precise descrip-tive name must be too long also. Unless we say qrfq;ilqf

sTEeTsqIfl the (descriptive) name qEaFq[ql may refer to any

work consisting of eight adhyayas; as e. g. dafrkardcarya

used the word qagleqlrft to refer to a part of the $atapatha

Brahmana (vi,de bh:a;ya on Br. Up. 3.9 26). These seemto be the reasons why ancient authors usually refrain frommentioning the names of works from which they quoted.Since these works were wellknown there arose no necessityto mention the sources of the passages quoted.

2FUTTLITY OF ARGI]MEAITS ADVANCED TO PROVE A

TATER DATB OF THE YOGASUTRA

It is usunlly maintained by some scholars that the YS.reflers to such doctrines as are originally held by some non-yogic

schools, especially the Buddhist schooll-a fact which points to alater date ol the YS. In this section we are going to examine

the validity of this view. It is needless to say that on the

basis of this borrorving modern scholars are inclined to place

the YS. in the 4th or the 5th century A. D.2 though a few scho.

lars take it to be a work of the second century B. C.

(A) Woods thinks that the idealism of Vasubandhu has been

crit icizrd in YS. 4,15-17. which shows that the fourth centurv

l. Cp. ,'Now the difficulty arises thar the YS. is not regardedto be a very olcl wcrk, f(,r it is found to refute the doctrinesof later Buddrrisrn. Ffence it is far from convincing thatBuddha was ever influe;rced by Patafrjali ( O. D. S. S. T.p 9 0 ) .

2. His I Patafrjali's ] date is uncertain, though some seholarshave, with great assrtrance, assigned himself to the secondcentury B. C. f S. S. I. P. p. alO ); The system of yoga

appears in the sltra frrrm somewhere about the secondcentury B. C. ( C. H. I. III. p. t4 ); I I Dr. Kane ] am notprepared to pllce the present yogasitra earlier than thesecond century B. C, ( H. Dh. S., V. p. 1399 ); Not earlierthan 147 B. C. / H. I. P", l. p.212 ); The yogasritra islater than A. D.450 (Jacobi: The Dates of the Philo-sophical Sirras of the Brahmans,J. A. O. S. XXil ); Theconclusion would be then that Pataijali,s siltras were writt-en at sometime in the fourth or fifth century of our era( Woods : Yoga Philosophy, Introduction, p. XIX ),

Futility of arguments advanced to prove a later date llg

A, D. is the earlier limit of the YS. (Yoga philosophy, Intro-duction, pp. li-lB). Keith considers this ils more decisive andromarko that the YS, cannot lle oldrtr than the third centuryA. D. ( Samkhya System, p. ?0 ). If r. Chakravarti also is of theopinion that the Y5. refutes the doctrines of later Buddhism( O. D.S. S . T . , p . 90 ) .

The invalidity oi these views can be proved easily. Let usconsider the aforcsaid three sf i , trr .s one l ty one. In si l .4. l5(oastufi,m1t, "" " ) Pa.tairjaii afTords e reason to prove that thecitta andthe ustu ale dist;nct ( i, e. they belong to the differentlevels of existencc ). Does the worcling of this sfitra show an] in.intention to crit icize any view r If rhis sfttra be tar<en as re.futing a BudrJhistic vi, lw, the 3i1. on abhlnsa-aaira,o.ya (1.12) mayalso be taken as <:ri i icizing Ru'.lr lhi,;t ic views, for faraoair-ag1a isassociated n i ih pr rus. t l ;h")at i i l .1 , , r1 er .d I iur r lsa l , the immutableAwarerress' is nrt rccentr:ir lry the B'cldhists. l\,[oc]c'n crit icsshould riote tirat thi: Yogic r,iew on cdlta ar:rl udrrsr, which saystlrat both ci,tta and u$stu t. i 'e lhc nrociif icr.t ions of asmiln,(or aharhklra, an evolute cf t l,e tlrrr_.1 :Iunr.,J is ba"ically differentfrom that of the BrrdJ.hisl-" an*l t lrr,t since the Buddhists do notaccept ttre three.qufas ti lere dtrcs not arise any necessity to alludeto or refute any B'"rdrliristic vi,,,r.,i. The oh.iect of this sEtra scernsto strerlgthen the p;sit it,rr oi ' ... r, ierv of the yoga school. ABuddhistic view may be agairi.t this view of the yS. concerningthe relation between ihe uastu rrnd rhe d,tta but this opp.sitiondoes not prove that the aforesaid silrra crit icizes the Buddhisticview. It may be noted in pzr.ssirrg that the relevant Buddhisticviews do not help us in any wa.y understaL,d. the significance,depth or lbrce of the argument given in the above sEtra.

As regards rhe s[lra 4,16 (q r*tfqa-.) *u have alreadystated that this may not be a genuine part of the yS. (VideChapter IV. sec. 3). Even if the sfrtra is taken as belonging tothe YS. it cannot be proved that the sutra is really clirectedto criticize a vierv which oriainally belonged to some Buddhistschool. In fact this siltra refutes a doubt that naturally arises

120 An Introduction to the Yogasfitra

from the view established in the previous strtra or strtras. It

is against our tradition to hold that the objections (aiahkas)raised in the sfitras are the views held by opponents unless thereare reasons to think so. Can it be proved that qSFSf,(;4

is a distinctir'ely Buddhist expression ?

The strtra 4.17 (dgq(.rrtir.--.) states the condition owir,gto which a aaslu is known, The srrtra does not contain anyexpression which seetirs to have a purpose of criticizing others,views, It is perfectly clear that the purpose of the sirtra is todiscuss a matter which requires to be known by those whofollow yoga metaphysics. r\s a thing's affecting and non-affecting the citta is in consonance with the nature of the guq.asand as there is no Budohist word in this siltra, it is unreason-able to hold that the sutra contains a criticism of any Buddhistview.

It is true that the Vytsabhasya on these and other sirtrascontains such signs as show thai: its author knew of the Buddhistdoctrines and that he atlerpt(rd to refute them. (According to usthese views belong 1o th,: earliest works of Buddhism.l It isagainst all sense of logical t lr irrking to attribute to a sutrakbnall those views which :rre reluted by abhag2akZrc, especiallywhen the shtrakdra does not r se such expressions as are peculiarto the school whos,t vicr"s are refuted. A bhaglakara is empow-ered tc raise independer.t qut stions provided they are Jonrrect-ed with the views e stablirrhed in the sLitras.

Modern schol;rrs should note in this connection that yoginshave their own oi.jiiinaodda. According to yogins the matcrialcause of thetcnndtras is the asmita or aharhklra, precisely thelanasa aspect of alnrhk rra. called bhntadi, This bhiladi (the

evolving cause of a brairmdlda) must belong to a highly per-fected reing. He is usually called Prajapati or Hirapyagarbhain ancient works and is called yatrarim-avasdyin in V,' i isa-bhdsya 3.45.3 On:rccount of ttre wil l (sarhkalpa) of Prajdrati,the bhftJddi gets objectified and becomes the ma.terial cause of all

3. The S5rhkhyakarikl uses the word Brahmd for this beingin verse 54.

Futil i ty of arquments advanced to prove a later date l2l

kinds of grahhJa olf3ects. The minds of ordinary jluas becomeLssociated with the objectified bhmadi and being affected byit the jzaas become compelled to deal witlr the objects with theirorgans in accordance with their faculties characterised by previouslatent impressions. The uiqoyas ( sound and the like ) are said toappear as a result of connection between thc two kinds ol miDds_one belongin g to the jlp6s and the other to the creator. That iswhat we call the yogic ai,jfrAnauada. The yogins further assert thata jiva by practising yoga can render his mind so powerful as notto be overcome by the bhUadi of the creator and thus hetranscends the realm of objects.

(B) Keith showed two trorrowings of the YS, rvhich pointto its later date, namely a reference (i) tothe theory of atoms insfr. I.40 and ( i i ) to the Sr"utrdntrika view that rime consists ofmoments (sE 3.52) (The Saftkhya S1,stem, p.69).

A close study of the rclevant sirtra reveals that there doesnot arise any question ol borrowing regarding the yogic viewon param5qu and time. Keith seems to possess lamentableignorance of the view p'rint of the YS. It is highly improperto hold that a technical word used in different systems bearsone and the same sense. The word paramnryu in sil. 1.40 doesnot mean a thing that has no aaaldaa (part) ( which is the para-mafu of the Nyiiya-Vaiiesika system ). According to S:ir;rkhya-Yoga all ayakta entities are with parts (s[vayava). It is also to benoted that in this sfrtra the word param'aqu is an adjective mean-ingsttksma and that the suffix eE is also to be connected withit (like paramamahattaa) so that we may get the intended wordpatamAputaz., i. e. szk.natoc, which has nothing to do with theVaiietika paramAyu. A gross thing does not become snk[na ifits form or volume gets reduced, or its dimention or magnitudebecomes lessened, The examples of parand4rulua are rhe subtletyof tanmS.tras, the subtlety of serrse organs (by which the tanm:r-tras are perceiveJ) and other similar forms of subtlety. The tan-mdtras of Yoga are not niraua2aua in the Nyaya-Vai4qika sense,for they being dharmi,ns are sAmaryta.ai,ieta-dharmdtmaka. The

122 An Introduction to the Yogasiltra

organs are also not partless entities, their being the modifica.

tions of the gu',ras (every evolute of the gunas is saad)aaa accord.ing to Sarirkhya-yoga metaphysics). It is worth observing

that tlre idea of the subjugation (ua(zkara) of the parandqus byyogins is not to be found in the Vai$qika system.

Modern scholars should note that the paramdnu (in thesense of tanmltra) of Siirirkhya-yoga has no sirnilarity with theparamanus of Ny-ya-Vai$esika. According to the YP. theparamlpus of the Vai6esika system are the objects of ai,kalpaoytti,(for uikalpa, see YS. 1.9). The tanmdtfas are capable of beingperceived with the help r:f rhe concentr.arion known as oi,cara-anugata-samlr ajVdta.

The assertion that rhe Yoga view about time originallyl ,e longed to the Sautr lnt ik : rs {oes r ,ot seem to ha-"e any baSis.

It is not understood why the view rhat 't ime is the sequence ofk$nas ( uut*w o! eTqrartiilTl )' is not ro be ascribed to somepre-Pataiijalian school of yoga to which Patafijali belonged.Moreover the Yoga rriew about time is not pr€cisely the sameas is found in the SautrdLrtika school. Does the Sautrdntikaschool think that t ime is the olrject ol oikatlaaytti? Logicallyit must be accepted that where thei.e is a Eystem of yoga thataccepts the existence of the gagas which are said to bc prati.k;ana-pari.rlAntin {cp. Vo t gnEnq, BhIsya 2:15.), there wil l apearthe view about time which is cxpr:essed in the Bhdsya passage€ <I€E{i stui"'aTqgpqt (on YS, 3.52). The question of borrow-ing from the Sautrantika- school does not arise at all, for thisschool does not accept tlre three gu4cs.

(C) Max Mijller thinks that the arsuments put forward insupport of the existence of t laara (see YS, 1,24-2G ) showthatthe YS. was composed after Buddha, for these arguments aredirected against Buddha's refutation of i3vara ( S. S. I. p.

p .412 ) .

Futility of arguments advanced to pro\,€ a later date l2g

It is true that Buddha tried to refute the existence oflSvara. But a perusal ofhis sayings as preserved in the Tripi$akaundoubtedly shows that his idea about idvara was Uaricattydifferent from that in the yp. Buddha,s sayings do r,ot showthat he had any knowleclge of the philosophical analysis of theaiiaarlas of l$vara, He had even a very superficial idea aboutthe nature of the creator prajapati whose existence is in fullconsonance with Sarirkhya_yoga metaphysics. There is nothingin the Tripifaka that shows ttrat Buedna war aware of theSarirkhya*Yogic analysis of Godhood. Max Mtiller showed utterignorance in the yp. by stating that the word isvara used byBuddha had the same meaning as in the yp.

(D) Some scholars are of the opinion that the yS. was compo-sed after the Mah:ibhasya as the yS. upheld the doctrine ofsphola oriqinally propouncled by the author of the Mahlbhii ya"( The doctrine of sphota discussed in tbe bharya on yS. 3. lZ isaccepted by these scholars as upheld by the author of the yS.

).The view that the theory of sithoga was originaily propouri-

ded by the author of the M:rlrIl-rhesya is against the traditionof grammar. Some hold that the pre_pl.rinian grammarianSphofayana was a promulgator of the doctrine of sphoLa ( aidePadamafijari on Kadika 6.l, l2B ). Audumbardyana

-mentionecl

by Yaska is also said to be a propounder of the theory of sphoga( Spho{asiddhi, p. l. ). All these show thar the theory of ,pnitowas propounded long before the author of the Mahdbtraoya. wehave already stated that the yogic view about the nature ofiabda,artha and their relation is not absolutely the same as isheld by the Vaiydkaranas and as such it is philosophically *.on*to ma.intain that the sphltauAda of grammarians has been upheldby the YS.

(E) some are of the opinion that the concentration knowo asDharmamegha ( yS. a.29 ) is Buddhistic ( i. e. the Buddha orthe Buddhists invented this concentration for the first time ) asit is mentioned in the Da.Sabhirmika Sastra ( Vidc C.H. I. IIIp'74 )' It is true that this $astra speaks of ten bhamis and praces

124 An Introdrrction to the Yogasiltra

the Dharmamegh-a bhnmi on the last place' But as there is no

sign to hold that the yogic Dharmamegha is identical with ( or

"rl"n i.tu.r,olly similar to ) the Buddhistic Dharmamegha' the

similarity of terms proves nothingr While the YS' says that the

Dharmamegha concentration arises when one gets fully establi'

shedinaiaekakhydtii.e.sattua-puru'4rydta-pratyaya(discernment

of the separateness between purusa and prakrti ) the Buddhist

philosophy is silent on the puru:a principle' This shows the

illogicality of the view tha-t the Dharmamegha coilcentration of

the YS. is based on the Dharmameghe bhimi of the Buddhists'

It is also to be noticed that Patafljali used the rvord Dhamamegha

as a safujiidlabdo ( otherwise he could have framed the sfrtra aso"' sdqt fsi+reqtfr f{d+aq sclftT: [*ai]' ). This being a

saitjla the vierv of modern scholars about borrowing becomes

groundless.

(E) Corvell. with the intention of proving that the YS. was

aware o[ Buddhism, observes: "It is curious to notice th^t mai,trl,

which plays such a prominent part in Buddhism, is counted in

the Yoga as only preliminary condition...... The Yoga seems

directly to allude to Buddhism in this marked depreciation of

its cardinal virtuet'( Tr. ofSarvadar$:nasalhgraha, p. 273 ).

The argument is as worthless as anything. The YS. (1.33J

regards moi,trt ( fr iendliness ) as a parikarman and says that it

can bring about ci,tl,a-prasadana ( undisturbed calm of the mind ),which positively enables an aspirant to follow up higher forms

of yoga practice. The cultivation of mai'tr| is especially prescribed

by yogins for a particular kind of persons-who can be highly bene'

fitted by cultivating it. As the dift'erent forms of yoga practice are

not of the same charactPr, it is reasonable to conclude that all of

them cannot be enjoined on all, though each form of yoga

practice has its own value. lf maitrt is accepted ar one of the

highest means in a system, it simply rneans that the system is

inferior to the YP. so far as the subtlety of goal or encl is

concerned. It appears that Cowell was ignorant of the fact

that 'there ls gradation in the means ( upays ) prescribed by

Futility of argurneuts advanced to pfove a later date 125

yogins'. That is wby the question of depreciation does not arise

at all. The critic should note that such a highly praised yogahga

as santola (contentment), which is said to bring abouttfluttanasu-

khainYS.2.42 is regarded by the great yogio Jaigi;avya as a

form of dulfthaif it is compared withkaiuar,a 1flaw*gurtuie qE-

rSad waiegqgqttq, *seqttaqt g g:<Tls, Bh::sya 3'19)' Doesthe statement ofJaigtsavya show that he is depreciatingsanto1a?

We may furth,:r add that there arc cogent reasons for not

giving mai.trT a highly prcminent place in the scherne of upa)as

as is given to paraaai,rdgla, oiaekakhyali, and nirodha. The Yoga

school avers that it is raga4utga-k;a1ta ( iradication of attach-

ment and hatred ) which is absoltrtely nccessary for acquiring

oiaekakh2ati, ( .p qlqsiqriE6lTiE qgfAetA', YS. 2.28) and that the

cultivation of ntaitri enables one to get rid of th" tnmasa fluctua-tions of the mind to a greater degree, but not absolutely. As

thisbhduina is associated with external factors it falls under the

field of )amd-ni.)arnd. Though nai.ti,r|-bhduanri chiefly possesses

the sattua gu(La, yet it cannot be the direct means tokai'aal1a. ltis not mailri,bhdaana b* rdga-duega-kgaya which leads one toemancipation.

3DOES BUDDHA'S SILENCE ABOUT THB YS. MEAN ITS

NON-EXISTENCE AT HIS TIME ?

In the previous section we have stated that Buddha,steachings seem to have been based on the YS. though we neverfind Buddha to refer to the YS. In this section we are goingto consider the causes for Buddha's silence about the yS. or itsauthor. Following consideration will show that since therearose no necessity to refer to the YS., Buddha remained silentabout it-

(A) At first it should be noted that .the mere non-mentionofa treatisc ( or a teacher-author ) by a person of later agedealing with the same subject' cannot by itself be taken as asign for inferring the non-existence of the treatise ( or of theteacher-author ). The non-mention of any previous comrnerl.tary or commentator by Nimblrka in his bhasya on theBrahmasiltra and by S5yana in his bhlgvas on the Vedic worksare the examples ( out of many others ) that prove our asser.tion. 'Non-rnention' becomes a sign if i t is proved that,mention,is inevitable or at least highly necessary according to the natureof the discourse. The act of mentioning predecessors' nameslargely depends upon the discretion of the author, and we seldomfind our ancient teachers to follow the custom of mentioningthe names of their predecessors when their views are taken asthe source or basis.

Let us show what we mean by ,highly necessary,. Necessityarises either at the time of refuting the yoga views or at thetime of upholding a vicw on the authority of the yS. As theviews of YS. on yama, niyama. vairdgya, etc, were propoundedin some other ancient works also more or less in the sameway, it is not necessary for a person of later tlmes to refer to

Buddha's silence about the yS. l2l

the YS. at the time of refuting or propounding them. As forexample, if a person of modern times wants to criticize or praiseahiitsd, it is not necessary for him to refer to the YS., for it isquite possibie that the source of his knowledge of ahiirsd, is notthe YS. but some other treatise or treatises bea ring viewssimilar to those of the YS. If Buddha may have come to knowof ahithsa etc. from sources other than the YS. ( though tlre yS.

was e)rittent in his time ), his non-mention or the YS. cannotbe taken as a sign of the non-existence of the YS.

(B) Buddha is said to har.'e refuted more than sixty viewswhich he regarded as erroneous. It is remarkable to note thatnone 0f these views is acceptable to the YP. also. We may affirmthat all of these refuted views are anti-yogic. 'fhus it is clearthat Buddha found no occasion to refer to the YS. at the timeofrefuting the aforesaid erron?ous views.

(C) Buddha is never found to mention Ar. qla Kdldma andRudraka Rirnaputra as the upholders of such views as are essen.tially against his teachings - ::. fact which sliows that Buddhaknew that his viervs irr tireir essential forrns rvere not againstthe doctrines propounded in S.,rirkhya-Yoga. 'fnis

explains whyBuddha did not meution Pctafijali as one of' tire tai,rthikas ortNrthaikaras ( teaclrers holding anti-Bucidhist views ),

(D) The subjects tbar are ciriefly dealt with in the yS.

and are considered by Buddha are l; it is, safuskaras, karnans,dhltdnu, samdi;atti,, control of the senses, ignorance andltama-nilamos. Anybody can find that Buddlra did not deal with thesein a strictly philosophical way and that Buddha's views aboutthese are not very deep and sharp. So far as the essential formsof Buddha's teachings are concerned they are not against theyogic point of view, in spite of the fact that the viewpoint ofthe YP. is not the same as that of Buddha. That is why Buddhafound no occasion to refer to the YS. as the hord,er of dissimilaror opposite views.

Let us explain the argurnerrt by taking the Buddhistic formoi prdgiy6ma as an example. Since the Budclhistic prdrlylma

128 An Introduction to the logastrtra

is neither so deep and subtle as the Yogic prEpdydma, nor is

it anti-Yogic, so far as the external process of pr'Sqdydma isconcerned, a teacher of Buddhistic prln6yEma would find no

occasion to refer to the YS. as the holder of a different orcontrary view about prlpriy5ma, in spite of the fact that thephilosophical basis of yogic prdpiiyama is not in aecordance withthe Buddhistic view point. A somewhat similar example is

found in the Buddhistic sa,napatti,s. Though the principle of

division of the these tanapdl,tis does not sffictly follow the Yoga

view yet no necessity was felt by BudCha ( or even by Buddhist

teachens ) to refcr to the YS. as the upholder of a different oropposite view on san-apatti,, for the simple reason that the external

character of these samapattis ( as shown in the Tripitaka passa.ges ) is not different from the Yogic ones. It is a well-known

fact of experience tlrat there may exist difierence of opinionconcerning the subtle sta.qes of a phenomenon, although there

is agreement in the views about the gross Etages of the pheno-

menon. The views of two persons may differ about the compo-

sition of living body, though they may be found to hold thesame opinion regarding its weight and height.

(E) It was possible ( though not absolutely necessary ) for

Buddha to mention the name of Patafljali or the YS. had he

launched a severe attack on such views or entities as the satkdr'Ja-

ud,da,the dharma-dharmi-relation, the existence of eiti!akti, the

four aspects ( paruans ) ofthe gu,ryes, the concentrationa asa'npro-jf ianand the l ike. Buddha might have also referred to the

YS. had he tried to propound elaborately in a philosophical

way his views on the origination of internal and external objects

from their respeetive causes.

(F) A perusal of the Tripigaka shows that no first-rate

philosopher approached Buddha with a view to solving higherphilosophical problems. That is way Buddha found no occasion

to refer to works similar to the YS. As for example we may say

that there arises no necessity to refer to a work like the VS. if

a discussion is held on violence, theft etc. taking them in the

social level.

I Buddha's silence about the YS. 129

(G) Some may think that Buddha's non-mention of theYS. at the time of refuting the existence of ldvara shows thatthe YS. was composed after him, for it has a considerablenumber o[strtras on i6vara ( uida YS. 1.23-28 ). The unsound-ness of the argument will be proved by the following consi.deration.

Buddha's rcfutation of iSvara is directed to the popular'$vara, who is not in strict accordance with the views of the yS.

The YP. has its own views about the creator i3vara ( i3varastated in YS. 1.23 is not the creator ).1 Buddba's statementsdo not show that he was aware of the Yogic view about thecreator iS./ara; he is never found to quote the yogic argu-ments given to prove the existence of the creator whose ahalhknracalled Bhut:idi is said to be the material causr: of the brahma4{a.Buddha does not seem to possess a deep knowledge of thestrpernormal powers, a knowledge of which is indispensable toc0mprehend the nature o[ both the eternally liberated i(varaand the creator i$vara. All these show that Buddha's refutarionof iSvara har no concern with Yogic iSvara. It is also to beobserved that the principle of pra4idhano ( devotion ) is notagainst the teachings of Buddha, for Buddha expressly enjoinedprapidhnna to the teachers, sages and the l ike. Thus we cansay that as Buddha prescribed tlaara-prapidhana in a gross form,and that as he was ignorant of Yogic tdvara he found no occasion

l. Though thc YS. is silent on the creator ( who is usually

called by the name Hiranyagarbha or Brahm.i ), yet the

existenee of this being is in fullconsonance with the view-

point of the Yoga philosophy. The lordly powers existing

in the mind of the creator have been fully described in

the YS. The Vyasabhdqya ures tbe word )atrak-anuoasA)'in

for the creator ( YS 3 45 ). The creator falls under the cate-

gory grahtty.

i3O An Introduction to the Yogastrtra

to refler to the YS, while refuting the popular views about the

cre?Itor i$vara.2

(H) There seems to be a stronger reason for Buddha's not

referring to the YS. There are certain questions which Buddha

refused to answer considering them useless for an aspirant of

truth. It is remarkable to note that questions similar to these

are siven in the Vy6sabh6:ya as examples of -atnabhAoabhAwnd

( reflections on the nature of the self ; aide VyS.sabhlgya on

YS. 4.25 ). The importance of these questions in the YP'

cannot be denied. As Buddha remained silent on these ques-

tions, he thought it appropriate not to mention the works like

the YS. in which these questions had beetr discussed seriously.

(I) We have a conjecture regarding the absence of Pata-

njali"s name from Buddha's sayings preserved in the Tripiiakas.

We sornetimes tind Buddha speaking highl.v of ancient yogins

and in a very small number of places we find him mentioning a

lew yogins by name. This suggests that Buddha might have

mentioned the names of some more ancient teachers also. These

names seem to have beerr removed fronr Buddha's sayings by

Buddha's followers afterwards in order to preserve his origina-

lity in the field of sa.cred wisdom. As Pataf,jali's work was

too weilknown in Buddha's time, the followers of Buddha

thought it necess;rry to romove his natne from Buddha's sayings

so that Buddha could be described as the original thinker ofthe Yoga doctrines he Preached.

-ffifutation of iivara, the frillowing remarks

of Dr.M.D. Shastri deserve notice : "Buddha never denoun-ced or refuted the idea of i3vara in the sense of ParameS-

vara. This does not mean that he recognised it...... Therewere two ideas which occupied the place of :3vara in histime. The one was of the functional Vedic gods, and theother of the absolute and attributeless brahman. He accep-ted the former idea; but in the place of brahman he installedDhamma orDharma.. . . . . Thisshows why Buddha whorecognised the traditional functional gods, lndra etc. andwho substituted Dhamma for Brahman, did not denounce

i:vari" ( History of the word i$','ara and its idea, S. B.Studies, Vol. X, pp. 54'-55 ).

CHAPTER

V

IMPORTS OF A FEW WORDS IN

THE YOGASUTNE

IIVRONG EXPLANATIONS AND RENDBRING$ OF SOMB

WORDS IN THE YOGASUTRA

A considerable number of the expressions in the yS. arefound to have been incorrectly explained or rendered by modernscholars-a A few of such wrong explanations or renderings arequoted here with brief criticisms. A fuller discussion on thesewill be found in my forthcoming work on the yS.

(l) The srrtra 1.3 ( aet aag: H6qsE{(eTIqq ) has beentranslated by V. M. Bhat as (then the soul rests in its naturalstate of communion with the divine,. If the nature of draflfis understood according ro the view*point of the yp. (aidtYS. 2.29 ) there arises no question of communion with God,whose nature has been described in the fiirst pada (sitras 24-26),The proper meaning of the siit'a is : in the state of cessationof all fluctuations of the ciilo, the dra;ty f metempiric conscious.ness or immutable awareness ) abides in himrelf ( though he issti l l associated wirh the citta ).

l. The nam€s of scholars whose views are considered in thissection are given here with their respective works. V. M"Bhat: Yogic Power and God-realization;J. H. Woods I TheYoga System of Patanjali; Dr. S. Radhakrishnan : IndianPhilosophy, vol II; S. C. Vidyarnava : An lntrodudion tothe Yoga Philosophy; Dr. Sure*acandra $rtvdstavya : yoga-

sfrtra-bhftyasiddhi ( in Hindi ); Dr. Haridas Bhatracharya :Cultural Heritage of lndia, vol III; E. E. Wood : practicalYoga; Ballantyne and Govinda Sasri : Yogastr,tras of parafl.

jali; Dr. Sampilrndnanda : Yogadar$ana ( in Hindi ); lvl. N.Dwivedi r The Yogasitras; Dr. V. K. R. V" Rao : Theisrnin Pre.classical Sdnrkbya.

134 An Introduction to the Yogasfitra

(2) The word.agama in 1.7 is usually translated as'autho-

ritative rtatements or gentences' by modern scholars. Agama,

according to the YP., is a kind of cittaqtti which arises in the

eitta of a person wbo hears the sentences uttered by an dpta'

(3) The expression 6;qiln ( 1.9 ) has been rendered by

Woods and f)r. Radhakrishnan as 'perception and words2. This

sbows that according to these scholars aikalpa has two bases,

.{oDdo (words) and jftana (perception). They are wrong' According

to the commentators sabdajfldna is to be a.nalyed as labdajoni,ta

lfrana lverbal knowledge or thought based on or caused by

words or language; or mental image conjured up by words )'

(4) Vikalpa ( 1.9 ) has been rendered as doubt by S' C'

Vidyarnava. He is wrong, for doubt has been included in

oipar2aya ( I B ), one of the eittaottlis (fide T. Vai. and other

commentaries). Doubt lsafi iaya ), which is usually defined

as 'the cognition of the presence of incompatible diverse features

in the self-same entity' ( Tarkasarirgraha; sec. 7l ), has no

similarity with oikalPa of the YP.

(5) Dr. Sure$acandra Srivdstavya thinks that the word

qqil+Kdar in 1.15 is the name ( nanaka ) of the a\arloahag)o.

In fact that word is not a proper name; it shows the essentia"l

characteristic of aparaoditdgla. The word saitjfi'a does not mean

here ,a name' but tittC i. e. 'consciousness', 'convictiont and the

like.2 Commentators use the word gfa ( T. Vai; Maniprabha,

etc. ) or fsqd ( Rdjamertan{a ) for {1 which shows that {1

has not been used here in the sense of a 'name' grammatically

speaking if ssft+K is accepted as the name, the correct expression

should have been used as arfi*niaq and if qqil+t(gf,l is accepted

as the name, the expression should have been used as q{iittc'

iari*q or qsft6r((iilTnTq{q ( €<rraq ).

2. The word{s1 in qiilsctq in Panini (1. 2.53) means{11q

( Mahdbhasya ), which has been explained by Kaiyafa asq?nTc: risrqq:.

Wrong Fxplanatians and renderings of the yS. lg5

(6) Some scholars think that the strtra l.l9 speaks of twokinds of beings, namely frakyti,laSta and, oidehalala, i. e., they thinkthat the word la2a is to be construed with tbe word. aidehd also.This view is utterly wrong! for in'o autlroritative yogic textswe find the word oidehalaya. Moreover the word aidehatayadoes not yield any sense, though prakytita2a t a Bahuvrihicompound, qffll q4:,<1;q4il qT qtq q:

) has a clear significance.we cannot take aidehalaya as being a word of either Babuvrfhior Tatpuruga compound.

(7) S. C. Vidyarnava says that the process of overcomingthe obstacles (enumerated in 1.30 ) is through abhs,asa aniuai.ragla ( 1.29 ). The word 66; in 1.29 cloes not refer to abhlAsaand uairagla ( ai,de l,L2 ) but to ,devorion, (i luarafuapidhdna) asis ampry clear from the Bhdsya (c;artat tsErcforricrq q q4f:d).\'Ve find no reason to connect iIiT: in si. l.2g with the strtra l.ll.

(B) All modern scholars are founel to think that the siltra1.40 speaks of two factors, namely ltara,ndryu and. paranamahattaa,In fact the strtra spealis not of parantA4u but of paramd.nutua.The suffix eq read after the word paramamahar is to be construedwith the word, parantdr4u alsaS cp. the ny61,a 661;ft q.qqlq:

sr6Et sriafFfedqsq*.

(9) The expression sli{feff,I{fq6Eq in 1,42 ( on savicdr;i

samlpatti ) has been explained by Dr. Haridas Bha tacharyaas : 6all the elements of perceptual knowledge, namely the sound

(ldbda ) or the name, the meaning ( ortha ) conveyed to themind, and the actual object ( uastu,) are all rolled up together.'The explanation is \{rollg. Artha in this strtra does not meanthe meaning conveyed to the mind. Arlha is the otrject intended,as e. g. the animal cow is the artha of the iobda cow ( see theBhasya ). We may call it aastu also. Prat))aJa is the idea ofobjects; it is the mental impression created by the word. The

jftana of YS. 1.42 is the same asthe lrauala of YS. 3.17.

136 An Introduction to the Yogasotra

(10) The word ali,hga in 1.45 has been explained as 'that

wbich is beyond definit ion'by B. E. Wood. It is wrong.In the

siltra in question the word aii,hga mast be taken in the sense of

avyakta prakrti, which is however not beyond definition. It is

called alihga as it is not the lihga (markor sign in the Nyilya sense)

ofany other thing. Since avyakta prakrti has no cause it cannot

infer the existence of its cause \il qI |*fssnE iogufa qTTqfa Cfa

qfu,gq), Lihga nevet means 'definition' or 'defining attribute'.

Smokeis the l ihgaof f i re , thoughi t is not the def in ingat t r i '

bute of fire. Some exponents take liiga in the sense of lalta

( dissolution ) and assert that since avyakta prakrti canlrot be

dissolved into a more subtle state it is called ali 'r iga.3 According

to ul this view is of latcr origin.

(II) The expression ?lasr;rT ( l.4B ) has been translatecl by

Woods as'the insight is truth-bearing'. Since the word ?idrrl{f

is a sa'hjfta labda ( oide Palini 3.2.46 ) the expression is to be

translated as 'the insight is named Btambhara'. Since tbe

tatkjfr,d is anaarthaa ( i. e. a term whose meaning is intelligii:le

initsetf), it is quite justif ied to holdthat the nature ofthis

prajitA consists in trcaring truth.

(12) The expression $agntqrq io 2.4 has been rendered

by Woods and by Ballantyne and Govindasastri as 'the field of

the others'. It is wrong to render gfl{ by 'others'. It properly

means tthe following oncs' or 'subsequent entities', as opposed

to ffirua. In tlie p1"::l l,r.o

it means entities mentioned after

3. The word /ingc in this sense is not found in a-ny ancient work.

No grammarian clerives the word lihga as od q;qfa' The

later Purl+as, however, take this word in this sense, aida

Sivapurer.ra 'cuttq foqnlneg*d a*q tqfqd qqq' (ll l' l0'

3B).4. aT;qsigat is defined try Kaiyaqa as E{{iqg{dl, alqq fl arErr(I

aqrifaasfaftfqtr qr qf,r qls;ariqia't ( Pradrpa on N4ah1'

bha;ya 1,4,82 ); on this NrgeSa remarks : slg.i it?(4Jrrle{'

ryfnftfuteri:;'q,i s qlqsaidar qrsdiilT siqi'|

Wrong explanations and renderings of the YS' 137

aaid2a in sn. 2.3. Gr:rmmatically speaking, utlara, being a straana'

/n4n, expresses the sense of vlaaastha (certainty of limitation; udda

Panini l. 1.27 with ttre ganasirua EdctTET ' '

) and as such

it is wrong to take it in the sense of 'others'.

(13) The word g'Fdgga in 2.10 has been translated as'an

antagonistic prodrrction' by Ballantyne and Govindasashi'

Though 'prati ' sometimes signifies opposition, yet this sehse cafl '

not be applied properly to the word in question. All commenta'

tors unanimously agree to take the word in the sense of pralaya,

dissolution (i. e. dissolution of the ci'tta) and this is the only sense

that seems to be valid hete, Pratiprasalt is never used in the

sense of production wf ich is antagonistic'

(14) lVhile explaining the slt 3.14 S. C Vidyarnava re'

marks that 'dharma means the substance to which the properties

adhere'. This is wrong; it is the dharmtn to which properties

(dharmas) adhere. Though a dharma becomes a dharmin (as is

shown in the Bhnsya on 3.13), yet the above assertioncannot be

accepted as 'n'alid. According to the YP. a dharrnin is in reality of

the nature of dharma-samahvo (aggregate of attributes belonging

to the three phases of ti me). That is why a oastu or ttthd is often

called 'sAmanla-ai.iiqa-dharmAtmdk4'. So far al the phenomenal

point of view is concerned there exists difference between dharma

and dhdrnzin (Cp. the Bh6sya passage : qil;ilTqEgqrtrTtE 3.13).

(15) Dr. Sampfirr.rZnanda takes the words sfirla (3.26) andeandra (3.27) as the sun and the moon of asFonomy. In fact,thesewords are pdri,bhagikas and they are to be taken in their technicalsenses. In YS. 3,26 sfrrya means sitrladodra, solar entrance,

i.e. the sugumnaduara (oide Bhdsya) and candro means the ,lunar

entrance', mentioned in various yoga works. The word dhruaa

in 3.28 is also used in a technical sense known to in the yogins.s

5. The statement {til tWlgrqfr is found in same treatises onyoga and I understand that this is the only sense applicablein YS. 3. 28. A full discussion on this will be found in myforthcoming commentary on the YogasEtra.

l 3B An Introduction to the YogasEtra

(16) M. N. Dwivedi translates the sirtra SIFdqTq qr gdq

3.34 as 'or everything from sarhyama on pratibha'. Since theword prdtibha has been used not in the seventh case-ending butin the fifth case-ending, it is wrong to speak of sarlryama. Thepratibha is an aspect of vivekaja-jnana (3.52.54) with the help ofwhich one can perceive all, Salsa (all) in this siltra rneans noteverything but all those powers that are mentioned in the forego.

ing strtras i, e. from sil. 3.16 to 3.33.

(17) Some scholars are found to think that the si.ddhi nameduiuekaja jfrana in 3.52 means 'the knowledge produced by oiveka

i.e. discrimination'. In fact this siddhi arises as a result of samla-

rna practised on kga4as and their sequences (sil. 3.52). Vi.aekaja

1;ranais a technical word (sarlrjia-iabda\ and it is to be taken inthe sense shown in YS. 3.52 and 54. It is not produced by

lstaqqf( i, e. qt{ltgTiqEt-triqq. It is aiaekakhLati' and not

oi,uekajajil,ana that invariably leads to isolation' The word

faltq may however be used as a laugika labdd (in the sense of''born of d,ueka')also, an example of which is found in the Bhasya

orr 4..26 where it uses the word flqlis.q$fffrrq for the word

ls*+ff,eilq in the sirtra.(18) The word sattaa in su. 3.55 is taken in the sense of

prakrti by Dr. V.K.R.V. Rao. According to the commentators it

here means buddhi' and according to us this is the only sense that

suits the context. Sattva cannot mean prakrti, for prakrtiiuddhi

has no intelligible meaning if considered in connection with

kai,uotya ( prak'yti, taken in the sense of mrlapraklJi ). Dr. Rao

does not seem to use the word prakrti fot buddhi ( though

buddhimay also be calleda prakrtiG ). Since there is predomi'

6. Technically speaking the bud.dhi is one of the seven prakyti,-

aikf tis. Since dissolution in r.he buddhi, falls under prakTtilaya,

buddhi, may be regarded as a prakyti,. In the Tattvasamdsa

buddhi, is regarded as one of the eight prakyti,s ( qgl cSAq:,

sfrtra 2 ).

Wrong explanations and renderings of the YS. 139

nance of the sattoo guna inthe buddhi, it is often called buddhi-

sattva ( or even sattao for the purpose of brevity ). For the samereason citta is sometimes called ci'ltasattua.

(19) The woyJ, asmitamatra i$ 4.4 has been rendered byWoods as 'the sense of personality and from this alone'. Therendering is confusing, AsmitAma"tra is the name oi the sixth auijc.

ga (t{g{rfatq}sftqatcrqs, Bhasya 2.19). The word is to be dissol-

ved as a{f*qil flqt i. e. gtd qtq (aFatwa) 93. Since this cuiJrga

is characterisedby asinibhdaa it is called asmitd,mdtra. It beingone word (a name), the word miitra cannot be rendered separate-

ly. ufitarw?, being an example of the Bahuvrihi compound, may

bE used in any gender according to the gender of the noun ref.

erred to by it (cp. fqaq af€ca1q1nq,l.36)7.

(20) The expression tuiluauqQ6liTlccrtq?(dq (4'.9) has

been translated as'even when they are obstructed........ ' they

are still within' by E. E. Wood. This shows that the translatorhastaken the word anantdrJa in the sense of 'the state ofbeing

within something'. It is wrong. Ananmrya (noun) is derived from

ananlard (adj.), which is a compound of ra with antara (a

BahuvrZhi compound), Antara in the present context means 'in-

terval', 'intermediate time'. Thus Anantaryo in this sutra meanrqaqsQ(il, 'immediate sucession or proximity', 'the state of

having no interval or pause.'The sDtra does not contain the word

qIrili.

7. It would be wrong to disolve the compound word qRcatcrc

as sTftq<il qzf taking it as a wold belonging tothe qq€dq51fq

group, for in this sense the word would he neuter. In YS,

4. 4 the wotd asmila,mdtrc is masculine, and it is taken in the

sense of cftoftkara ( the sixth avi$esa ) , the material cause of

the eitta i. e. manas. Tbat eitta in nirmd4acitta (in YS. 4.4 )means manas is clear from the bhdgya on 4. 4-5 and the

commentaries thereon.

140 An Introduction to the Yogasfitra

(21) The word tsTI4I??t{T(qq in 4'20 is dissolved by Dr'

Sure$acandra $rivastavya as BII4(4 (ratl < fsqqtq <) utaurr-

u1{. Grammatically it is wrong to dissolve the compound in this

way. It ought to be dissolve d as gtlqli olqirq[lqq. ubhay in the

singular number meaning 'a whole having two parts' does not suit

the context at all. Ubhaya does not mean (two'.

(22) M. N. Dwivedi translates the silra 4.26 as 'then the

mind is bent towards discriminetion and is full of lcai'aa$ta' 'lhe

translation does not at all express the signitlcance of the two ex-

pressions fqimflqfi and frqeqslTlqtr and it is philosophically

wrong to say that the mind becomes full of katualla in a parti'

cular state.

2VARTA i A WRONGLY CONCEIVED 1VORD IN THB

YOGASUTRA

Y S. 3.36'Tatalr pr a tibh a-fu iivalia-vedan I-d ari [.sv6da.viir.tdlr jdyante' mentions six siddhi.s that arise on account of a parti-cular kind of sathTama (constraintJ. According to the commenta-tors the name of the sixth siddhi is tdrt-a (a word in femininegender ending in a), According to us the reading is doubtful, forif the word is accepteC as feminine, the expression, pratibha,..,.,vlrtrih (in this sfitra) becomes a word of ferninine gender (theexpression bcing a daanda.compound ending in a feminine word)ahd consequently ii hecomes impossible for the masculine wordfa in the following sirtra .Te samadhav upasargih vyutthene sidd.hayalr',(3.37) to refer to it l . It is a pity that neither the commen-tators nor the modern exponents ha'e noticed this glaring i*e-gularity. It would be highly i l logical ro solve the problem bytaking the irregular use of the word ,a as an example of Ar;cpra-yoga (i.e. te has been used fot tdh). In fact there is no irregularityin the use of the word te provided the siitra 3.-q6 and especiallr,,the name of the sixth siddhi, are understoocl properly. Accordingto us the name is not atutA but odrta (ending in c) as the follow-ing consideration would show,

The fancifulness of the derivation of the word v6rtl ( a

f"*irl": y"11 ""dng

in a) from the word uyili, as found in some

I, That il 1VS. 3.37) must be taken as refering to the exprcss-ioa 9rfec.......qTflt: is beyoncl dorrlrt. Even if i t is taken asreferring not to these particular supernormal powers but tosupernormal powers in general yet the diff iculty of construc-tion is not got or,'er, for both the words sdddi i and aibhnriare feminine and as such they cannot be referred to by themascnline word t.

142 An Introduction to the YogasEtra

commentariesz clearly shows that virtd cannot be the original

reading. It can be easily observed that none of the senses of the

word v6rtds, can, in any wayr be associated either with gandha

(smell) or with gandha'saiwid (perception of smell)a' One may

also notice irregularity in the use of ad.rtd, for while the names of

the first five siddhi's are masculine the name of the six siddhi' (i'e'

oarta) iE feminine. Though such a change in gender is not in

contravention of any established rule of framing sarirjflI'words,

yet the change creates a doubt about the corfectness ofthe word,

especially when the feminine word a-arta does not bear any

sense that has any reference to either smell or to the perception

of smell or to the sense of smell. It may also be observed that the

names of the first five si'ddhis are significant in as much as their

derivative meanings clealy show the nature of the respective

sirlrihis, while the word aarra in the aforesaid sense does not at all

seem to be a significant word.

If we take tbe name of the sixth siddhi as a'atta (andnot'

odrla) which is to be derived from uarti (with the secondary

suffix cp) meaning a ball or pill made of the powder of fragrant

substances5, or a Paste made of cosmetics prepared from various

,. vtdt Blrin: qffl{raeil ilf':q+rll cRqisqr ardfialg;at qtit

rrrqfsst qFa trest r gd'at0firr{tsr qT<rr srd tl?EdfrrE.

No lexicon however reads {ffi in the sense of the olfactory

organ.

S. Vita usually used in the sense of tiding, livelihood' the occu'

pation (of a VaiSya) comprising agriculture' breeding of

cattle and trade (Afv'ril<e4'slfqcq).

4.. sl(i is explained by the Bha;ya as the power of perceiving

di,ala gondha, a view which is followed by all the commenta'

tors. R6mananda however takes it in the sense of fqaqq;q'

qI€6 EftqlGE4 which is essentially the same as the Bhdqya

view.

5. The GandhaSdstra of Gafrgddhara says : <qare{d\sT6f(mfs{'

ugifaeoatrdsd: r qiqaaii: flqst: eTqI{s+I€g ztdq: 6lqi! ll

(P. K. Gode I Studies in Indian Literary History, ll' p' 4)'

Varta o A wrongly conceived word in the Yogasirtra 143

subetances, none of the aforesaid problems arises. Thus it standtto reason that the word, odrta can be used as a name for a super.normal power connected with smell or the perception of smell. Inthis sense the word vdrta is masculine.

If we take the name as oarta in the aforesaid sense therearises no diff iculty in construing the expression.prEtibha........v6rtdh' (a masculine word in plural number) with the masculine(pronoun)word le (in plural numberJ in the following sfitra (3.3i).

There are strong grounds to believe that the author oftheBh6sya reads the name of the sixth sidd,hi zs adrta (and notvdrtD). As the Bh6sya, while esplaining the siitra, has used thefifth case-ending with the names of the first five siddhi,s (pratibhet. . . . . . , . . { rAvatet . . . . . . . . .vedan; i t . . . , . . . . . Idar- ia t . , " . . . . . . i isvEdl t ) , i t isquite reasonable to conclude that it has usetj the same case-end.

ing with the name of the sixth si,ddhi, also i. e. it has read aldi(leaq{tqfqwtq{ though the printed reading of the Bhagya isaraf{r, a forrn of the rvord udrrE tvitlt the selondary suflix losinstead of the lifth case-cnding.

This absence of uniformity in using the case,ending createsa strong doubt about the genuineness .,f the reading aartatah, rtis quite likely that the aurhor of thc Bhasya has used the expre.ssionadrtd,l using the {ifth case-ending to the worcl o-arto, thename of the sixth si,dd,hi. Since the word virta as explainedabove became obsolete in later t imes6, some scribe or a yogateacher, not understanding the se'se of the rvord, corrected theBhaiya'expression udrtiir as ud,rrdtalg-a form which is highly simi.lar to adrtdt,

That there really occurred a change in the use of rhis wordis proved by the employment of the word udla for it in the yosa-sarrasarirgraha of Vijflanabhik;u; aid.e the Viclyavilasa prlss(j. The obsolete character of the word may be inlerred from the

fact that the Sanskrit-English Dictionary of Sir Monierwilliams does not mention the wofd in this sense. it derivesettd from {ffl and {fi.

t+4 An Introduction to the Yogasfrtra

editit ion of 1921, p. 55. The Theosophical Pub|ishing House,

Adyar,ed.of l933,(p '55 '56)readsvd' taandnotestheteadinga'ar ta

as a variant. As Bhik;u is silent on this word in his Yogavdr-

ttika on YS. 3.36 it is quite reasonable that in both of his works

he used the same worcl i. e.' rtdrld' as the name of this siddhi' lNe

understand that the wotd uAtu is also the result of ernencation by

some scribe in the place of udrtd, who, findinE no sense in the

word aiirtd with reference to smell or to the perception of smell

or to the sense of smell, correct€d it to oala (air) thinking that

air had an intimate connection with smell; cp lanilhaaaha, a

s y n o n y m o f a i r . T h e f o r m a d t a c a n n o t h o w e r ' e r b e t a k e n a s t h eoriginal reading, for had zrZlo, which has intimate connection

with smell, been the original reading, there would have been

little possibility to change it to adrtd, which has no connection

either with smell or with the perception of slnell or with the

sense of smell' The Purdnic passages as printed do not read

oatabvt aatta as a name of this siddhi, (vi,de saurapurlna 13. 4-5,

SkarrdapurEga, Kumirikl 55. 62'69)'a fact which tends to prove

that vdta cannot be the original name of the siddhi,

The explanation of the word verta as given in the Vivara-

4ra comur. on Vyasabhrigya 3. 36 also indicates that the origi '

nal reading cannot be taken as varta, It reads 'wttau bhavarir

vdrtarir lokr"sarirvyavahiirajii [nam, tasm dt', which sh ows that tlte

commentary took the word as adrta a neuter word ending in c'

meaning'a knowledge of rvorldly usass5" In all probabil ity thc

"o****u,yreadt l reBhdsya.expressionasudrtdt ( f i f thcase.e l ld .ing of the word ailta) and'not as oArt:ttaft, the reading as printed'

It is unfortunate that the editor of the Vivararla commentary

failed to notice the difference between the Bhigya expression and

the commentarial Passage'

'I 'he rncaning ot+daqailrali{ of thc word odrla (a neu-

ter word ending in a) as given in the Vivararra commentary ai?-

pears to be wrong, u, to yogi" work is in favour o[ this liew' It

seems that as the author of the Vivarar'ra was not aware of the

original meaning of the word aartahe offered an imaginary ex'

)

l0 tflarte : A wrongly'conceived word in the yogasfitra 148

planation. The duthor of the Vivarapa failed to realize thatsince a\rta was read with the siddhis, viz. 3rlivapa, vedana,Edar*aand Ssvdda lraving connection zoith sound, touch, colour andtaste respectively, odrta must have connection with the remainingquality, namely smell.T

It seems that since the root {{ means 644€T" a.lso (cp. adqfn'

in the sense of aaE€1fd), the author of the Vivarana comm.

cxplained ifrd in the sense of ol+aqs€ttflIE; cp, Siva-puraga

7. 2. 38. 12 (eraf sTd{ fsflr;i siqris tQrrq). It is one ofthe later Puri4as,

7.

3Norns oN A FEw lvoRDs

r I ) KUSIDA IN YS' 4'2e

The YS. uses the word akusl'do (at word of Bbhuvrihi

compound, meaning one having no kuslda, ;TIft( S{ifti q(q,

qualifying a yogin of highly advanced stage ) and remarks that a

yogin who is ukusida to prasafithhydndL, a higher form of dhySna',

attains the concentration called Dharmamegha' As the word '

kusl,ila ustrally means 'using money for excessive gain or profit'z'

'tbe practice of lending money at a rate of interest considered to

be too high:, its relevance in connection with prasaitkhlana is diffi'

cult to understand. Some commentators are found to take the

word akustrd.a in the sense of ahahta 3 ( unattached or passionless)'

which seems to be highly doubtful, for kusida is not read by lexi'

COgfAphcrs in the sense of raga (attachment); nor is the word

explaiued by any grammarirn as meatring attachment. The ety'

mology of the word kuslda frcm the trvo words kutsita and sl'ddt

as given in the DharmaSdstla4 works is popular and as such it

l. cp. c{aqlirr 6IltA{ il(64r: ( aatvrtal 2.ll ); s€ireclilfi{qt

5r(eF'dIE {e$i{ (2.21;s$aqlqErq{tcrqteqtc: ( 2.13 ''

2. otqtuT Ei;rcch: gslsq (Medhatithi on Manu 8.151 ); {{eat" qccqlTlr EclEq ( Kullaka on Manu B.l5l ); Sdlcq alr'

qIqJ qqqq]rTi ( Maskarin on G' Dh. S. 10.6 ). In such

expressions as 5e)<qlq ( G. Dh. S. 12'26 ) kuslda simply

means application of money ( Sdtel qacq'lq:, ({ Tfawsq:,q(rftqrcq ). gdts must be EoTFaft*a.

3. gftufrg faelg etele efe gdt<) rtq:, <tal€it*r ( Maniprabha,

Yogasudhikara and Yogapradipike ); srg€lEtq fscctteq{i:

( rrcrtt ecrula ); algdlEtq lclfqiatqtq ( wa<o<6tu );al5stcttT soq alfocs]: ( 11ecta'o-eZ[e ) r

4. Vid.e the remarks of thecommentators on the word Sdlaeuin Manu ( s.152 )

'tggesr qr dfafi( ft3itEq" ( Medha'

tithi ), "lfteetq cs(f( qxf qiql qfr lilaler:" ( Kullilka ).

Notes on a few words 147

deserrres to be discarded. we therefore think it mors reasonableto take the word kusldo in a figurative sense, for in this senseit suits the context appropriately. [t is needless tq say thatthere are a large number of words in Sanskrit expiessingfigurative sense when used as members of compound words

or used with the taddhi,ta (secondary) suffixes6.

It is well known that the figurative sense of a word musthave sorne connection with its primary meaning. Three pointsare to be considered in ascertaining the figurative sense of the

lvord \rnlda, namely (i) taking something jn excess (adhikagra-

\fg )6 (kunda is in excess of the money given to the debtlr);(ii) the arising of something on account of something ( interestaccrues on accounr of money given as loan );and (iii) blamablecharacter ofthe act oftaking 1 ihough money_lending is enjoinedby authorities, yet taking too much interegt is regarded

", u

"uo_surable act ).

rt is not difficult to ascer.tain the figurative sense of akusl,da,A person is said tobe akuslda in respect of an acquired thing ifn3 doe_s not want to get such results from the thing as _"y

"r"Iurucbstacle in attaining superior results or higher goals. The sense_ { - .5. qlq) s cqei E€ os'{csi{?rqrrq ardfut, sqr sitilcErrci ilfrfu

f Papini s.2,72), crq*{rf}TiqFa 1rani.,i s.z,ls} qerre}( Pradipa on Mah5bbalya g t.4 ). The gaupa (flgurative Isenses of rile, tsse and rtEI" are rcspectively rf;eflRiff,nlq+f<at and afilg.Btllrr. The word aflflrt{ meaning fleshsignifies longing in the word hrrlqc ( Viilc Manu6.4g ).The following words with the particle fag indicating absenCe Erre worth noticing in this connection ! fiEgq 1in ttusQnse of lurified' ;, factutt ( .IEf ) ( in the sense of .notcurrredi y, hFlGaa ( in the sense of .bereft of pramdna, )( KullEka on Manu g.l8), h(q6tf ( in rhe sense of ,unche.cked, uncontrolled' ).

6. For tlre sense of alflssq{E, aidc , edhdtithi on Manu g.l$l.

148 An Introduction to the Yogasrrtra

of harmfulness is evidently suggested by the word kustrida' for

usury was regarded u'o "*"'uble

( ga&1a ) act i'i ancieirt timts

1 fanini +.+.iO'gt ), it being a source of pain to debtors'

Let us see how this figurative sense becomes applicable to the

yogi** described uboo"'it"ording to us the expression 'sdeqtfi

cT6f,le:, refers to sucn a yogin who has acquired the prasatl*h1-ano

il, u"", ".i

want to possess those results of prasaitkh2anathat

*^r, "uor"

his downfall' These results are no other than the su'

;;;; powers like omniscience' etc' As these powers are not

fi;*-;;t" prasankhyano and as thev arise in consequeo": o'f'

o'.-qui.ing prasa'ft*h4ana. tlte dcsire to possess these powert,::,lt*t

i"tit *" act of taki"g kusl'da' fhe act of taking excess (adiiftagra'

h,u,,o 1 i*clearly discernible in the desire of acquiring supernormal

po'*"r. tfrough.prosarl*hlana' r\s the u;e of these powers may

"*r*" .lo*nfull to a yogin, it may rightly irc rcgarded as a censu-

rable act like the act of taking interest'

I t i squ i t ec lea r tha t thcsenseo f the rvo r :dakus l ' ddcan r . I o t

be fully expressed by tire wv'd airakta. (clevoid of desire)' I'or a

;;il'it i,itt"llv d"u"a to acquire prasaitkhiana irr order ttr

,rproo, the afflictions (klcias) etc' [t rnay also be observed that

the sense of the censuratrle act of adhika'grahat.ta cannot be ex'

pressed bY the word oiraftfi

Tbe Bhssya passage ealsfq a ftfs<q sreiq* clearly

indicates the sense as cletermined here' It shows that the

yogin does not want anything other than ft,asafikhl1lal-11:

uftl, .tiuioi ng prasafitkhynna a yogin should endeavour to acqurre

hdra brasothkhlanu (Vi'de Bhasya l'21 and should never think

5r' ;.iqff ; ;';h" -'"p;;;o;;;i -p';;irs

through pr asati*hl ana'

( These pow€rs ars no doubt the natural results of yoga

;r;;;;"", but thev do not naturally lead o'e to kaiaalla' )

The acquirement of thesc powers with the help of prasarhkhldna

(a bigher form of dhyfrna; is similar to-the taking oi interest'$w{da)

as has been shown above' The Vivarana comm€ntaly

brings out the aforesaid sense clearly'7

u{ela: .I?la-st ?rqld,+l--?tsfrd. ealsFq cdeqrtcstEfstqrelqd ;t

f+Fsq crsiqi ( Vivarar.ra ),

( 2 ) JANMAKATHANTA SAMBODHA IN ys.2.39

In YS. 2,39 jannokathantdsdrhbodfta (a thorough knowledgeof the conditions of hirth) is said to indicate the perfected state(slddhi-sncaka) of the practice of aparigrahd (restrain ofthe desirefor receiving or acqulring things indiscriminately). If we comparethis result of alarigraho with those ofthe rest of theJornas, thereappears an anomaly as is going to be discussed here.

A careful consideration of the .results' of thc 1irst fouryomc.r,namely ahirirsE, satya, asteya. and brahmacarya reveals thatthey arise in persons other than the yogins ( who practiseahirirsfi, etc.). As for cxamltle oli,rat1ilga (suspension of enmity),whiclr is rl ie r.esrrlt of ahith;rt-hrati.srha ( \ 'S. 2 35 ), ir to befourrdin the persons or animals who r:orne nerr a yogin whois firmly estftblished in ahirhrd. Similarly the result of satyalrotiglha ( YS. 2.36 ) is to be ftrurrt{ in a person rvho receivesboons or curres fronr a yogirr rvho is established in truthfulness.The result ol' aste211, is sai<l to lrc thr: upastlttna. f approaching )of r6lnas. i.e, highly exalted persorls who willingly come to yoginsas they regard them as trustworthy persons and present themprecious things reverently ( yS. 2.3? ). This resulr i, e"the act of cuming to yogine end preseuting them preciousthings is also found in ttre persons different frorn the yogins.Practice o{ brtthtnacurla enables a yogin to instil his knowledgeinto tl'e minds of his disciples so that thty becom* able tocomprehend the doctrines of ndhyatunodyi properly ( yS.2. 38 ). Here also the result of brahnrucarlc is ro be foundin persons orher than the yogin. l'hougli the supernormalpowers no doubt exist in the yogin, yet it is the perionsother than the yogin who are affected or benefitted bv thesepowers.

J annakathannsambodln, the result af afarigt.aha-ltratiStha( YS. 2.39 )

'is found to belong to a yogin who practises

aparigraha and not to the persons coming in contact withthe yogin. It is the yogin who possesses tbis safibodha which

150 An Introduction to the ogasfitra

consists in the: ttrinking of the origin, stat€s' etc' of the

knower and the objeets 1 uida BhdlVa ). As janmakathantasofi'

bodha (as stated in the Bhdlya ) is found in the practitioner

its character is not in consonance with the character of the

other four results, for they are found in persons other than the

pmctitioner yogin. It is an anomay and deserves to be solved.

We are of the o'pinion that the Bhd':ya does not explain the

term jdnmakatlmntl-sadtbodha' The Bhaqya simply says '{W

rl?f6; QdT qq€til fgdq:' at the time of commenting on

YS, 1.39. There are grounds to surmise that the Blirigya

passage elucidating amabhdoabhduana in YS. 4' 25 has been

inudrlrtuntly placed here' by some scribe thinking that dtma'

bhaoabhaoana and janmdkathantdsarhbilha are the same'

The idea of the scribe is manifestly wrong' The expression

AffiabhAaoiijfidsa in the Bh6;ya passage on 2'39 elucidating

janmaknhantatarhbotlha undoubtedly shows that the purpose

of the passage is to elucidate dtmabhdaa-bhdaand'

' Moreover if we consider philosophically it would appear

that the Bhdqya view on the character of janmakathantd'

sarlfiodha cannot be taken as valid. Aparigraha congists in

restraining the desire to accumulate or receive things indis-

crirninately, It is impossible to show any connection between

restrain and the knowledge of the conditions of onets birth'

According io uz janmakathantd'satitbodfta must arise not in

a yogin but in' the mind of those people who are closely

associated with the yogin established in .apafigtaha, As a

result of observing a yogin established in oparigraha

the idea of janmakathanta gradually developes in thele people,

i e. these people become compelled to think about the birth

of the yogin. To be explicit, Parigrah{l presupposes the existence

of ra.ga,and there is no' embodied being who is found to be

bereft of raga, The yogin is born as an embodied being but

he is not affected by r'aga. observing this abnormal phenomenon

( which is not caused by insanity, idiocy or ignorance ) eeopte

Notes on a few words lst

begin to think how this yogin is born. It is this considerationwhich, according to us, ir to be lEnown as jonrnakathanlLsafibodha.Janmakathailrz' 'includes some other kindred thoughts also.A firm resolve fot aparigrafta proves the validity of a consider.

- able number of philosophical views also.

( 3 ) JYoTr$MATi

We read the fbllowing two siltras. in the section dealing

with the means for aequiring steadiness or stability of the mlnd:

Frqqsiif qr E?ff,ri,TtTr rTqs: ftqflelcs;qft ( 1.35 h frsr)il

sr cclfilqdf ( 1.36 ).

. It is evident that the full form of the siitra 1.36 is

fqu]fi ?rT sURTeiqqI qi{T: ltqfalcqrqf,l vqllaqqdt. The words

sgFtrtttwr-" ""Fcerqfi occurring in l 35 require to be connectedwith the words of the rltra I .36 in' order to make its sensecomplete. In both of these two sEtras prauylti meAns a blissfuland rupersensuous pe{ception. ( Pro seems to have been addedto distinguish it from the well-knawn a{ttl of the mind }.'

Here a- question arises about the significance or relevanceof the word jyotismati ( luminous, shining ) in siitra l.l5 whichhas the same case-ending as the word' r,i3ok6 Is it not enoughto say that there are two praarttis, namely Visayavati andViSokd which help a yoga-practitioner acquire stability ofthe mind ? Like Visayavari, ViSok:i is also a significant nameand it serves no purpose to give ViiokE a second name( i. e. jyoti;matl ). One may even raise an objection to givingtbe name Jyotigmati to the Vi$oka pravrtti exclusively, forsome of the objects of the Visayavati pravrtti also possessIuminosity. If jyotigmati is taken to be an expression qualifyingvisoka, the indeclinable eff should not have been used betweuitbese two words. As Vi$oka is the proper name ( of a pravrtti )there is no need in using a descriptive adjective with it wirhA yiew to indicating its connection withJ)oJis

152 An Introduction to the Yogasirua

According tousthe word jyotigmatl has been used afterthe words Vi$oka and vE to indicate that both the praoyttis,

namely Vi;ayavatl and viSoka are to be known bv the namejyoti;mati which, like the name $tambhard, is an anoarthasart{fta. It is to be noted in this connection that in sil. 1.35

Patafljali has used the word pravrtti not after visayavat, but

after va with a view to indicating that ViSoka is also a

pravgtti like Viqayavati.

We are aware that our view is not in consonance with the

views of the commentators. But since the views of the commen-

tators vary, we are entitled to strrdv the si.Ltras in a fresh

rvay, especially when we find that the views of the commer-

tators are not sound.

'According to some commentators the Vi okl pravrtti has

two sub.divisions, namely Vilayavatl ( the iriitial stage oi'

Vi*oka described in the Bhaqya passage (aagogila; €ITcsai""""

fCsdt ) and Asmitdmdtrd and both of these are calledJyotiq- ,

mati. This, according to usr is wrong, for there is no reason

to hold that the aforesaid initial part of ViSokF is called

Vilayavati.

Some hold that (i) all kinds of praaTttis mentioned in

1.35-36 are called ViSokd, (ii) all praoyttis, except the five

satitoi,ds connected with Sabda, spar6a, rtrpa, rasa and gandha

are calledJyoti;mati, arid (iii) any praaytti, that arises befcre

osmiladhyana is called Vigayavatt.( Vivarana on 1.36 ).r According

to us this is untenabl;, for therc is no evidence to take the

frve' salnitls ( namely gandhasarhvid etc. ) as falling under

Vi$okii.

It is to be noted that a.ccording to the Bha;ya each of

these two Pvavf ttis has t',vo asPccts' The chief aspect of Vigaya'

1. aq qrqufsqrFenftsatflsrat qsl fq{r}{a I cq}fatrT* gq*q'

ifssrFEsafqqsqaulffq? r Faqqsdt ?cftcilqlalq 5fi4

Eild fssqiqqiqr ( tra<or trtt ) r

Notes on a few words 153

vatl is of fir,'e kinds, i.e. the five saiuids of sound, touch, etc.

The secondary aspect of Viqayavat'i is connected with such

shining things as th.e .sun, moon and the like f all of which

aie made up of the five bhirtas ). Similarty the chief Vi4qka

pravrtti arises wheu the nrind becomes engrossed in asmitii

(Vi.de t:ne bhigya passage (cTf€cdTqi qrlt{;d Ftd"""'uafa ).The initial stage of this pravrtti, which is associated with the

vikalpavrtti ( YS. 1"9 ), is connected with the lustre of the sun,

moon and the like ( aide the bh-asya passage an ftvfodwrurq

:{?ftr3"""fee;eld ).

As we are of tlie opinion thr.t.lyotismati has trvo sub'divi'

lions, namely the Vi'ryrvati prav/tti and the ViSokn pravrtti, we

take the printed rencling of the bhdlya passagie tl,qf ddl fqsilqr

taqqcdt qftgatcrat s s?iiil: sq)faqqdlegtq* as corrupt. It

should be correcterl to QsI aqt fssrJ+r fsqqadf q s{fd: cqlk-

eciiltgqqil i. e. this prauytti,, which has tnr: atpect$. narnel-v

Vi$oke and Vilayatati, is called Jyotilmatl.

( 4 ) SARVARATNA IN YS. 2.37

YS. 2.37- reads {{t4sl(catqi qritcqtqtqffi{, rvhich means'all jewels approach a yogin who is established in non-stealing'.

T'he Vyesabhapya says rrothing on the nature af ratfla, It how'

ever takes saroain the sense of ' lying iu all directions (saraadi'k'

sthaJ,lt is unforttrnate that Vicaspati and almost all the comrien-

totors of the YS. are siJent on this word and Bhik;u's comment

1 uqieqt f<1+41 Q?iq{qlEq ) is brised ou the Bhapya. Some

hgwever speak of dialaratna while commenting on the ''vord rb'nn'

All these show tbat the word ratna was taken by the commen'

tntors in the sense of 'a jewel'.

I har''e a sreat doubt regardinq the validity of the expla'

nation ofthe word. srroa as given in the Bhdgya'

t54. An Introducrion to the yogasiltra

It can be easily understood that no useful purpose is servedif saroa is taken in the sense of saraa.di! ( all directions ), forratnas being physical things must naturally lie in differentdirections on the earth. More'rver it is highly improper to holdthat ratnas mdst always come to a yogin from all the ten direc-tions. Thus it stands to reason that to explain the word saroaby saraadii or saruadikstha.( situated in all directions ) is useless..

It would be wrong to say that saraa has been used withratna so that things simil ' to rarnat rnay.also be tirken withratnos,L fcrr such an inclusion has no significance in the siitra in .

question.

According to us r6tn6 in yS. 2,97 is to be taken not inthe sense of a jewel -but in the sense of ,valuable,, .possessingexcellence', i. e, ratnd is to be taken as an adjective of quality;cp. strdt wol agaea 6?$Tftr€ ahatr.a

lf'ratna is taken in the aforesaid sense, saruaratna can beexplained properly" saruaratnopasthiinam is t: be anlllrsed assarodrotniinan updsth-anq,m and, *arociratnani, is to be explained asq{qi {i{a{foT. This is in accordance with the v[rgliga gqlqalq (qr$; iltslqqq ( on pa,rini 6.2.93. ) Since in the sense6ilt{1 qfdl rlgitEeq thc word ratnt aeevntes the nature of anadjective, no srammatical difficulty arises in analysing the wordsaraaratna in the aforesaid way.

If we take saruaratna in the abovenoted sense, the meaningof YS.2.37 hecomes quite intell igible. The rctnal are of twolll9:._1]t n1b!-heafed- sentient beings and (2) inanimate things

l. Cp.Giri 's comment on B{sliq: uiTelrvrfq (Gtte 10.26 ).-"e'inurutrfce4s sdsro?a s{(sil* Tq;ilt' and Medhdtitli'scomment on wttlg ( Manu t I e2 ;-'tedi[60ltq err4Efc {cT-ilf:<rtcTt;f Tqil".

2. <rf (ffirfafcB ( AmarakoSa 9.3.1261, <ef ervrle,iGe ......

( Medini J; q( qT dsaai qTal ?rq {incF{{tqA ( quoted inthe Caturdharl comm. on SaptaAati 5.46 ).

Notes on a few words 155

that may serve some purPose of yogins 3 These sentient beings

approaih ]ogins with a vierv to acquiringdivine wisdom; similar'

ly useful things are presented to yogins with reverence by their

devotees so th:rt yogins may perform some works for the well'

being of people; In connection with inanimate things, the word

upasthana must be taken in the sense o,t upasthapana ( the act of

placing near ) ( i.e, the toot ttpasth-a will be taken as sTrgqtfSd'

oqei ) as inanimate things cannot present themselves to yogins

like sentient beings.

3, That the rvord rdtna beats these senses can be known from

..the most ancient iexts. The Tai. Sarh. ( 1"8.9. t'2 )

mentions among the ratnds \4, qtgqif, &Ifl e'nd olhers; see

also datapatha Br. 5.3.1.6 ( qaE sr qr4t r;d qE' qTqqil: )

and Tai. Br. 1.7.3-

( 5 ) THE INDECLINABLE PUNAH IN YS,3.1?

' The word punaft ( stem-pundr ) in the siltra d(! grT: sflia]'

faal ge*xaql fsteq qrlqdlsRqlc: ( 3J2 | does not appa'

rently seem to bear any significance. No commentator says

anything on this word. That the s[tra contains the word' punalt

is beyond doubt, for V caspati, Bhikgu, the author of the Viva'

raira comm. and rnost of the commentaries oo the YS' are found

to read the word.

The significance of tatah ( stem-fclas ) has been clearly

shownby thecommen ta to rs . lThe r^ lo rd ta t re rcad . i n thep lace

of lataft by the Vivarana comm. also bears a similar significance'z

Since Patafljali does rlot use the word punah ^t the tirne of def-i.

ning the other two pariq-amasrnamely nirodha'pari'4hmaand sanr1'

dhi.pariqana, the use of the word punal"t in the sltra or' ekdgrald'

paii\Ema deserves to ne considered carefully'-i.

-., -.i'i"* k:isa: q{t sf( ( a}aat; ); eer Xr: enrt:

tqi{tt{dlql qe€qtql fcsqa} se{t ( aiari: )'

2, cd gq: sctfqttil ( viv. ).

t56 An Introduction to the Yogasfitra

' It is abundantly clear that if we take the word punaft in

the sense of tagain', 'fol thc second time' it serves no useful

purpose. That is why we are inclinecl to take the word as

signifying bheda,sor ur'fe;a (diffelence) and rve think that the rvord

becomes significant if it is 'taken bere in this sense' By using

the word pu.nah Patairjllli wanted trr indicate that there is a basic

tlifference bctwsen the eka'gratl pari'ydma and the pari4dntas

ei f the n. l ture af n i rsdha ( YS.3.9 )and, nn 'ad 'ht ( YS.3 '11) .

A croreful considerirtion of the srrtras oll the three pari4.amas

reveals the difference, In Liiradh6'lrari,t.i7.Lma there is a'struggle'

lretween two oppoiite kinds o{ sathskaras, namely the altutthdna

sarhskaras and the ni,rodha'satitsftriras, rvhich is followed by the'r,ictory' rrf tht: ni,rsdhasathsltt-tras ( uide YS"3'9 ); similerly in

sam\dhi-pafi i lAma there is a'strusgle' between two opposite kindi

of pratyalas, n*tntly ssralrtltolii and eka.u,rata followed by the'r, ictor! ' of ftft lrf l t i ( oirle YS. 3.Ii ).

In the el;&,y,ratft-parinarr:a there is no such.'struggle' bet!!een

two entities pn:sessing opposite nilture and consequerrtly there

is no 'victory' of one over the other. It is the similarity of flow

of the alflis which requires to be retained for the manifestation

af eklgrdt6-pari,nima. Since ttriq 'sttugele' ( which is Pre'

sent in b<rtlr the nirodha ancl sannd'oi, potirJ.Amds) is absent in the

ckilgralA-pari'r.rdrn,z, I'.rtafl-i,rli seems to h:rve used tlre wofi' puno( in

the sirtra clefining ekAgratd-pari'rydna.

[ 6 ] NATURn OF AUSyL IN YOGASOTRA 1.30

In YS. 1"30 containing a l ist of impediments ( antarallsl

to yoga we find the mr:ntion of alaslta ( listlessness ), which is

defined in the Vyasabh:isya as 'lack of effolt on account of

heaviness of the body and mind'. According to ps the above

3. ll<rvt tt ( Rmara t +.253 ); lnuui rlaq, qfq{Tt s ttq asil qelr?(tsrq{ { Medini, sec avyaya, 72).

Notes otl a few wortls '

157

definition of dlaslta does: not slrow tite character af dlasia clearly.

one should observe thlrt dktsla is read a{tet prandila ( lrecdless-

ness ) and before cairati (worldliness), which suggcsts th'* dlas2a

must be connected with the mental field only ( and not with the

body also as has been stated in the Vyrsabhaqya ) and that

dlasyo mastbe a more powerful impediment than pratndda'

According to us the definition of alasla is objectionable or

to be more precise the printed reading ol the bhdq.va passage is

slightly corrupt. If we consider thg nature of the first impedi-

ment ayddhi, ( sickness ) and compare it with the last impediment

anaaotthitatua ( iostabil ity in the state attained ), we wil l f ind

that a follclwing irnpedirnent is more powerful than a preceding

impedimcnt. Thus we are to concludc that' d'lasla must be a

more powerful impecliment thatl pramada' As framdda has no

connection with the body ( i. e. it is mental ) alasxa must not be

connected with the body i. e, it must be rnental'

We think thtfi aloslta.is'non.desire or non"inclinatirn ( ap-

raoytti ) to deliberate or ponder ;rs a result of wenkness of the

rnind, i. e. wrong thinking'. This dlasl'a is a particular form of

oiciira-tnoha. A lack of tbe power of discrimination is at the root

of this non-inclination. That our view is not baseless is proved

by a statement in the Kapila-Asuri.dialogue ( d6ntiparvan,

Kumbakonam ed. ), which reads q]{ ctd alis(a}a afuS€.

The afbresaid view about the essential charaeteristic of

"dlarya is iupported by Safrkarlcirya, for he clefines it'as st{{I"oT

cfi6! {4rfqi{til{4tq oa;uTq ( Sarvasiddh:inta-sarhgraba, sec.

ou Pritafljala gistra, verse no. 4 1. To think that emancipa'tion

may be attained through jfana ( i. c' $I-AIEql;fq flTil, know'

ledge derived through hearing the cdstras or through inference)

and that there is no need for acquirint g samadhi is to be known

as alqsJa. In other words when one ceases from exerting proper

effort on a€count of rvrong t'hinking then this non'inclination

(apraaytti) iscalled dlasla. We may say that this dlcsJa is

essentially the iame as the ,tr,tti I conrplacency I of the'Seftkhya-

158 An lntroduction to the Yogastrtra .

karika ( verres 46, 50. ) Since this alas2a comes on account ofwrong thinking, it is read after pramdda in YS. 1.30.

It appears that the readings of'the delinitions of st2ana andd'lasXn ( as given in the Vydsabhdsya ) are slightly corrupt, The

printed reading of the Bh59y a on spna is RaI{{ affiriuqdf

lSffq which, according to us, is corrupt, for sryani is associated

with both ti.ttaaodkay (the mind and the body )' The Proper

reading of the bhlcya passage should be ftat;r{ sTsliu{dt fqftq

sfq{q {. The expression tflq(4 q originally read in the defi-

nition of slltdna has been wrongly placed in the definition of

alasya by some scribe., As yoga students, who are usually not

interested in such external matters as impediments, have not

properly considertd the reading ofthe bhaqya passage seriously,

we find the corrupt readings in all the editions ofthe BIdEya.

t 7I THE NATURE OF VIK$EPA-SAHABHUS

The Yogasfitra says that there are nine obrtacles ( afiora-yas ), namely uyadhi, ( sickness ), st6na ( languor ), etc., alsoknown as citta-ui,kgepas, which are removed through devotionand further inl'orms us that there are four accompaniments ( soft.

abkts)o{ uikselas ( distractions ), namely duhkha ( pain or sor.

rows, ) daurtnanasla ( desporidency or dejection,) ahgamejaytoa

( unsteadiness or shaking of the body ) and iu-asa-praiodso

( irrspiration.expiration ) ( 1.30.31 ). These two assertions give

rise to the following questions:

What is the reason for maintaining two distinct categories

as ci.tta-aik;epa and, ai,kge pa+ahabhtu? lf sarfiiay (Ioubt) is taken to be

a kind of ei,tta-uik;epc, is there arry reason for not taking daurmana-

syc as belonging to that very category? Again, it aladhi ( sicknessl

or alasla ( listlessness ) are regarded as citta-oikgcpas, is it not

quite reasonable to take ahgancjalatoa and laasa-praiadso as

falling under the same category ? Moreover is it not a clear

i\otei on a few words !59

bxample of anr:maly to regard duftkhd as uiksepa-sdhabha and

tuadhi ( which is traditionally regartled as a form of adhl"ahni'ka

tiufikha) as a citta-ui'kqtpo?

These questions' though not connected with any tottao,are

of vital importance. for the practical life of a yogin is intimately

connected with the factors mentioned in the afore:aid two sfitras,

- A 'close

study of the Yogasiltra helps us sslve the afore'

said problems in the folluwing waY'

According to us the wotd oik;epa in st' l'30 (citta'aikSe'

paft) andin 1.31 (aikqepa+ahabhzi,aaft ) dpes not bear the same

sense. In sil. 1.30 uikqepa means not distraction but rone that

distracts, i. e. the wr:rd. cittaoik|tpa is to be taken in the sense of

ci,tta-oi,k;epaka Vdcaspati was aware of this sensel thar is why

he explains oik1epa in s[, 1.30 as f,s[qqf;a efo fa&ltr, 'those that

divert or dishact are called aik1r,lls.'

' This sense of the word uikqepa is in consonance with the

nature of the nine entities regarded as vik;epo in sfr. 1.30. One

can easily observe that uyadhi, st;urina and dlasya ue not of thenature of citla-aytti, That is why they cannnt be regarded as

ui,kgepas ( distractions ) whilh afe the forms of ei,tta-uytti,; as can

be proved by some passages of the Vyesabh:r5ya. Though

safiiay (.doubt ), etc. ; ire of the nature o{ ci,ttaoytti, yetthey

are taken here as entities causiug distraciions. As a citLaurtti

may cause distractions, it 'can be rightly regarded as a ui.k6epaka( one creating uikgopa, distraction ) also.

It appears that the word. uladhi, in sI l.30 means 'disorder

of dhatu,etc. ( see Vyasabhagya ) and not proper pain caused by

this disorder. That is why vlddhi is not included kr tluftkha in stt,

1.31. Tliat the aforesaid disorder distracts the mind from prac'

tising yoga cannot be denied. The duftkha in sn. l.3l has a deep

significance as is going to be shown in the sequel.

The word aikgepa in aikgepasahabha inYS. l.0l means dis.

traction. According to us since dul$ha, daurmanasyQ etc. ( mtnti.

160 An Introducfion to the Yogarfitra

oded in sii. i.3l ) are invariably associated with uiksepa, iheyalc called .tah,abhns ( accornpaniments ) of t ik;epu; thrrt is to saytbat duftkha, daurmanasya etc. may be taken as lihgas ( marks )to infer the existence of distractions in a person in whom therearise duftkha, daurmanasla, etc. This means that if a yogin, evenif endowed with powers (siddhi,s ), is found to be associatedwithdulfiha, etc. hd must be taken to be a man capable of beingovercome by distractions. It shouTd be clearly noted that theexistence of duhkha etc. in a yogin undoubtedly shows that thedivine knorvledge acquired by the yogin has not attained to.

llerfection.

We rnay also rly that the exlstence of duftkha, ete. in ayoga.pra.ctitioner shows whethor the stage acquired by a yofin isstrictly yogic or not. As lbr example. if one-pointedness con:esas a result o{ the pred.ominance bf the tamas guna, then the yoginmust be overcome by daurmanarlo even at the time of practisingfrxity (d,taranrZ). Any acquirement, which is not strictly yogic,mustbe attended with dul.zkha, d,aurmanas;)a, etc. This association withdulpkha etc.isthe criterion of deciding whether an acquirernentis yogic'or nor. Tbe lbllowing example is ro be considered inconnection with this criterion, sleeplessness is present in bothinsomnia and ni,hajaya ( the state of transcending sleep ) ofyogins. Since . duhkha, daurmanas)a etc. are invariably associatedwith insom'ia, it is to be taken as n.n-yogic, lvhile nidra-ja1tamust be regar"ded as yogic, for in this state the yogin is not dis-turbed by dulftha, daurtnanasXla, etc.

It can be obserrred that the four accompaniments of oikgepasi distractions ; enable one not only to infer the existence of dis-tractions, but also to determine thoir depth or acuteness. Whilethe highesr degree ofdistractions is to be inferred ftom dufukha,the lowest degrpe of distractions, from (aa- s a- pr aiods a (inspirationexpiration ) Ahgamcjayataa ( theshaking of limbs ), and ilaurma-nasla indicate more ,.and much more acute forms of distractionsrespectively.

t6 lil

a

!

i,

Ir seems to us quite .jrrstified to hold that duftkha, daurmana,s,)a, ahzancjagatoa and iadsa-pralad'a are chiefly connected withthe ui,jVanana)a, nwnona)a, prdpcmay,r and, anndmalakolas respec;tively. lVe may say that disrractions connected with the azza.ma1akola can be inferred chiefly from inspiration and expira.tion; distracrions connected with prdqamayko,fa, from angame.jayataa; distractions connected with manomaya ko!a, from daur.rnanatJo and distractions connected with ai.jfi,amamala kola, ftomduhkha. As the iinandamala kola transcends distractions thereis nothing that can be taken as a mark for inferring them

in this ftoJa.

( B ) TI]E DIRGHA AND SUKSMA STAGES OF PRAL\iA.YAMA

Patafrjali says that if prdndydma is practised in the mannershown in YS. 2.50 it becomes dirgha.snkqmo. While translatingthe Yogasfitra Ballantyne rcrldr.rs the expression d.trgha-sfik;maby "long or short". This rendering is not only confusing butalso inappropriate as the following consideration will show. Itappea.rs that Ballantyne was ignorant of the technique of practi-sing pr-anayama.

The use of the word ,or' in the rendering ,long orshcrtnshows that the two stages, namely dtrgha and, silk;ma are takenby the translator as alternative, i. e. pr5n6y-ama attains eitherthe 'long'-srage or the 'short' stage. This means that while somepractitioners acquire only the'long, stage others acquire onlythe tshort' stage of prd4dydma. The traditional followers of theYoga school do not accept this explanation. They hold that anyperson can acquire both of these two stages oI prEr6yama if hefollows the process correctly.

According to us it is highly inappropriate to use the word'shortt for sfuk;na, though dtrgha may be rendered by (long'.

The two words ,lohg' and 'short' bear op;ps$te meanings; ,longt

is contrary ro 'shortt. The use of the two words ,long' and

*-i :F

r62 An Introduction to the Yogasfitra

'short' would show that pranayama has two mutually opposite

stages-a view which is untenable. No yoga practice can

bring about such results as are opposite in nature. This shows

that if dtrgha is reudered as 'long', si&;nta cannot be rendered as'short'. According to us sa&.Jmc may be conveniently rendered

by the word subtle or fine or by any other word bearing a

hindred sense.

The distinctive character of these two stages of pre$atama

has be,en shown by the commentators clearly.l The stage called

dtrgha seems to have been based on the factor of 'time', while

the sta e called sfrk;ma, on the factor of eeffort'. To be explicit:

when breath can be held for a very long time easily, accompa'

nied by calrnness in the rnind and a pleasing feeling ( often calledsukhasparia in the treatises on yoga ) in the body, then the prdpd-ylma is said to attain the stage called dtrgha. Similarly when

air passes through the nostrils so slowly that it does not produceany sensation in the tip of the nose ( or in other words the

flow of the air becomes so slow that it does not make a thread

placed on the nose move ) then the prdndy?ima is said to attainthe stage of sltkgma, In fact these two words speak of two kinds

of development of pr6ndydma in different directions. Thus it is

clear that these two stages are not of opposite nature.

To attain the dirgha stage one is required to practise (slow

breathing' rvith a particular kind of observation as shown inYS. 2.50; similarly to attain t}:re sfik;ma stage one is re quired to

exert as least effort as possible. Experience shows that between

these two methods viz. tslowness in breathing' and 'lowness

( alpatua ) of effort' the former is easier than the latter. Practi-

tioners of prar.Iayama should note that though these two methods

are not ofone kind yet both of them are to be applied by the

practitioners from the initial stage. Botb the methods are

mutually helpfr{. 'slowness in breathing' cannot be brought

(. €ldu'oacrfeelt .f,reT uafa, clgdqrctqlftqeqaqr ceq qfil

1 voganaiitit<a 2lSd i see also the commentaries by Bhavaga-

4e$a and Ndge6a.

165

about if effort in breathing is not lessened; similarly the amount'of effortlessness .cannot be rninimized i,f slowness in breathing irnot minirnized.

Traditionally we know that,the dtrgha stage of prdply5mais accomplished at first and then the sfiksnza stage. That thetraditional view is valid can be proved by experiment. It appearsthat Pataffjali placed the word dZrgha before suksmt, to'indicate the aforesaid fact. This shows that the word, ,dirgha-

flft{rnrth' musr be dissolved as qIEl Els\ffi: qiq:2 i e. prrBa-ydma practised according to the method prescribed in yS. 2.50.at first attains the stage called'di.rgha' and then the stage called.snk;ma,. Thus rrye can say that the expressson €tdqen speaks oftwo developed stages, the second appearing after the first.

2. That the word €t{ge+ ( a rvord of Karmadhdraya com-pound ) can be dissolved in this way is in accordance withPanin i (2.1.491; f : r fqef is to be taken as an example ofp-uraak-ala of this si*a, which shows that dtrgha is to betaken as referring to the first stage.

( 9 ) STGNTFICANGR OF Vl rN SUTRA 1.23

The particle aE in the sfitra ,iSvarapranidhenad vi, (yoga-

'srtra 1.23 ) indicates that there is an alternative means e*r"tieving the desired goal. That this goal is no other than yoga orlanadhi can easily be understood from the introductory remarks( pdtani,ka ) in the Vynsabhasya on sdtra 1.23.

Asto what is the means other than the tlaaraprayidhAnathe commentators observe that it is the tlarasatha,,gat stated in

l. q.--te- f,-(ra{irrr qrsrTrsiqraq ( yagaverttika }; (awr{dtedlmtq ( Bhasvari ). It appeare that Bhoja, BhavrganedaNige$a and others subscribe to this view. Woois translatesSfff{tq as ras a result of this last method;,, the method isno orher than f,fqei*{.

164 An Introduction to the Yogasltra

rntra I.2l ( Tivrasarhvegdnam lsannab )'2 lvu hold that this'

view is untenable as it does not suit the context' Moreover

sathaega ( literally meaning intensity ) ot tlorasamaega ( keen

iotenrity ) cannot be taken as a means (like abhlaso and aair-a*

g.1,a ), which is to be applied for inhibiting the fluctuations of the'

mind.

The reasons for not accepting intensity or keen intensity

as the alternative means are as follows t

The sn. 1'23 mentions the means llaarapor.,idhdnc by usirigl

this word in the fifth case'ending, and as such it is expected thae

the word expressing the alternative means must ha\'€ been used

in the same case'ending in some preceding sltra' The word'

ttrorasaiuega is not used in this case'ending in sir ' l '21'

Moreover the word rl,ardsalitacga in sh.21 is an adjective'

( qualifying a word denoting the followers of yoga, wbich is'

however understood here ) and as such it cannot be taken as'

expressive of a means like abh2asa. In this sirtra nothing is

enjoined. It simply says that phala'labho ( acquirment of results )'

sf rhe persons having keen intensity ( t1'orasatiroegc ) becomes

imminent ( -asanna ). Had the word been used as tlorasathucgenw

or tluusoti legat (with the third or the fifth case'ending respecr

tively ) then and then only llwasaiQega could have been taken'

as a means. The plural number in the word l,larasaitaegdnont

becomes inexplicable if rve take the word irl the sense ol a means-

We believe that the word showing the alternative means

must be in the fifth case'ending and it is gratifying to note thaf

the word expressing updla (means) irr str, l.12 has beenemployed'

2. The word <ilqe?rl has two senses according to the context..

In sir. t.2l it is used as a Bahuvribi eompound i.e. ono'

who has oretih ( as: ddtTl q(q or ierq ). It is used as a

Karmadhdraya compound (dlevatul tiltet, a€ute sarilveta)

in the Bhalya 2. 12, ( a1*tiltr fadRia; ).

165

in the fifth case-ending 1 Abhyasa'vairdgy;bhyam )'3 In this

stfira abhldra and oabAgla are used as a compound word with

,dual number. There is nothing to prevent us from taking abhyaa'

x)a,ir|g)a as a means ( two means connected inseparnbly as will

be shown afterwards ). The bha:ya uses the word' upalaa for

,these two means.

From the foregoing consideration it follows that there are

'two means to citlaarttinirodhai the first in the joint application

of abh4dsa and. ouirdgla and the second is devotion ( pra4i'dhana )

to lsrara. Thus it is clear that the means known as abhydsd.

.cairagya is the first means and the means called devotion

(iluara-prat.ridhana) is alternative to it.

It may be asked: how can it be ascertained that the expres'

-sior abhyasa-oab,ig4a has been used in the fifth case'ending in

s i r . I . l2 inasmuchas inthebha;ya both of these twowords

.are shown to have been used in the third case-ending ( Vidc t}l;e

.expressions oairagJe\a and siaekadarianabhltdstna) in the bhdgya.5

Our reply is: 'fhe meaning of the fifth case'endingishetu

.{ reason, cause ), which is also the meaning of the third case-

ending ( .Vidc PeTin i , I le tau I I .3 .23)andas suchi t is nofaul t

on the part ofthe bhasyakdra to use the third case-ending with

a worcl which is used in the fifth case.ending in the original text.

'Such a licence is generally permitted to the commentators' and

ris particularly permitted to the bha$yak6ras' who are not bound

a Cp. Slrirkhyasrrtra 3. 36 in rvhich both these words are

used in the fifth case'ending ( iulatctat{t"iT )' The

goal to be achieved by these two means appears to be

d$nna.

.4. In the lost Serirkhya treatise by PafrcaSiklra there was a

discussion onupd)at as can be inferred frcm Santi-p'320' 165'

5. Cp. Git;r 6. ss ( atrrta g +l;tc ittrlq s T-qt ) which

speaks of two rneans to manontgroha'

166 An Introduction to the Yogas[ta

to explain the words in the text by using them in the same way'

in which they are used in the original text.6

The chief aim of a bhsgyakIra is not to explain the text

word by word but to elucidate the views of the original author-

or to refute the criticisms advanced by the opponeots or even to

introduce a new topic not expressly stated in the original text.

It may be asked : the bha€ya refers to the peans alterna--

tive to tloarapra4idhara by using the word etasmat ( 1.23 )'which is in the singular number of the fifth case+nding. It

undoubtedly proves that the alternative means mtrst be one in

number and not two, while according to our view the alter'

native means consists of two entities, namely abh2asa a.nd.

aaird,g2a.

Our reply is : Both abhyasa and ao,irAgJe can be referred to,

by etastnat, a word of singular number since both of the means

are required to be applied jointly. Both the means, being

interdependent, form one upQta for bringing about cessation of'mental fluctuations. Abhyasa is defined as practice in discri-

minatory knowledge (aiuekadarlanabhydn ) ( in the bhdsyal.l2 ) or as exertion to acquire the undisturbed state of the mind

(sthitau ytnaf) (in the sitra I. l3). No person can realize even the.

grors lbrm of oia*a ( discriminative knowledge ) without culti-

vating oairagla. Similarly an aspirant being devoid of aai'rdgla

can never succeed in acguirng steadiness ( sthili ), which is

defined as urrdistulbed flow of the unfiuctuating mind ( cittasla

ouyttikasla praianW-aahim ). In the same way practice of

oai,rAg)a largely depends upon abhysa of the aforesaid character.'t'he element of karman is predomioant in obh2asa, while that of

jfi-anain oairAgya and they both become inseparable aspects or com'

rye whole, namely'uPiila'

6. The su. i 3 has the word i63T ( a%t ) while the bhl;ya uses'its synonym puru;a. In the srr. l.16 the word fwaCr4 expres'

ses the sense of quality. The bhagya on it does not mention

thequality butspeaks of a person rvhopoesesses the quality'

( g0r'a1aqcraqoqri+rq) farra: ).

167

That these two are like the two component parts of a whole

can clearly be understood from the expression ubhaladW,nalcittaay-ttinirodhaft in bhdtya 1.12. The word ubhala is eignificant; ir;means 'the whole that has two parts' ( ubhou aactloaau aslta iti ).tThe inseparable character of these two means ( forming one upd-

!a) can also be understood from the introductory remarks inbh.qya onsrrtra l. l3(athaAsafi nirodhekaupdlalg ), in which

the word u/qtd is used in the singular number, though the sil.1.13 speaks of two upA)as viz., abh1dsa and vai,rdgya, Thisbhelya statement clearly points out that neither abhydsa noroairdgla alone is so powerful as to bring about cessation ofmental fluctuations. Both of them should be practised in orderto subjugate oJfiis. Thus it is quite justified to use the word ubhalawhich indicates that the updyd ( means ) is one in number,though it may possess two aspects.

There are cogent reasons that show th^t safiaega ( intensity )cannor be taken as a means ( upaya ) to be practised with effortand will, Safiaega is of the nature of quality that arises in themind after a long and vigorous practice of virtuousness andmorality favourable to yoga. It is a kind of sarfutkfuas ( latentimpression ) which helps a person practise an act with muchde,.'otion and easiness. Sathaega ( lit.intensity / must be unders-tood as an incentive because it can make the application ofabh2asa, odirAg)a and tloarapra4idhana more acute, serious and

Compare the expression BrIIil qlqt which means a mahi (gemthat has two aL,ayaaas ( component parts ).

It is wrong to explain safiaega as aahag)d as is done byVdcaspati, for aahag)o has already been mentioned withabhlasa in a previous siltra. This meaning of sarhoega is notrecorded in the lexicons also. Fortunately the word isfound to have been explained in the .dyurvedasitra as

f,rw{g €"63(: d'eriq: ( 4.9 ). which suits the contexthighly.

7.

8.

l€B An Introduction to the Yogasiitra

firm.e ft is a general quality which may be associated even withthe worldly activities also. But the aforesaid means viz, obhydsa,aairdgla and T,ioaropraryidhana ( as defined in the bheqya )belong to the field of yoga only.

The following point may be considered in this respect.If the word tl,atasathaegAnAm (3 word in the sixth cas,r.endingwith plural numbc:r ) in si:. l .2i is compared with the wordsvidehaprakytitdyanam ( l.l9 ) and, itareg-cm ( l.Z0 ), it appearsthat yogins having keen intensity may belong to the classesment ioned in l . l9 and I .20. Such yogins may belong toanyother classes also. Since the word ll,orasathaega refers to yoginsi beirrg a Bahuvrihi compound ) it is quite proper to use it in theplural number. Had the word nurasafiaega been the name ofa means ( and in such a category it must be analysed as thatsa l i t . ega ( i n tens i r y ) wh i ch i s keen ( f i a ra ) (aKarmadhdryacompound ), it should have been used irr the third or fifth case-ending with singular number.

lt may be argued that the stem etad ( of which etasmat isused in bhdqya 1.23 ) refers to an entity preceding immediatelyand as such it cannot be taken as referring to a means whichis mentioned in a s[tra ( sE. 1.121 separated by as manyas ten sutras. Our reply is that etod refers not only to an entitythat precedes immediately but also to an entity which may notprecede immediately but which is not separated by a newlyintroduced topic, though many propositions may exist between

9. Vide bhdqya t.2l ( ca gqenlslc f"ke: -.'qld ). Here

{f,t|l4 is a Bahuvrlbi compound mean'ng one whose up5yas

are mild. The category of a {(Tta u)ft1 has three subdivisi-

ons, oiT U1$+{f, etc. This shows that upa)as may be associa-ted with sathaega. This also tends to prove that satitocga is

of the nature of quality and it can render ao upa)q, more

pcwerful. The updltas may be Tg, qEq or qfqcF and if

they are endowed with dtsd*rr, the rerult will be imminent

( dsanna ).

169

the preceding entity and the pronoun etad, In the yogasitra

the topic of abhyasa.oai.rdtltabegins with l.12 and ends with 1.22.The alternative means llaaraprcryi,dhana is mentioned in 1.23 onwhich the bhaqya employs the word etasmdt. All the siitras froml.l2 to 1.22 deal with the nature of abh;tasa and, oair-ag1ta. Thusit is quite reasonable to hold that etasmat in bh5;ya 1.23 must beconnected with abhlasa.aai,rdgya prescribed in sil. 1.12,

80. Cp. Papini . +.3

3. 134 and IV. 3.refers to the two5.4. 87 only.

143 in which ((4]: refers to sfftra 4.135. Similarty (tcc: in Pn$ini 5.4. 88preceding sitras 5.4. 86.87 and not

qAwqqtl'frrfsTdqrd

TqE qqrrrfiTdqsrwwq r

frdtgril ef ilsg: qqeiqa=qfu qrafi' ftT'lsRq tlv

( qR€ffi;Erraq{ )

v qqfd qa=efogfq

frc 4q'ts{twdsr+tilq I

Gfqal qofterc.

h'au6m uft'ia rt( fea<uritrnnrq )

APPENDIX I

VIEWS AND PASSAGES OF THE HIRANYAGARBHA

YCGASASTRA AS RECORDED IN

AUTHORITATIVB WORKS

Vi,ews

(l) The Vivarana comm. on Y5.3.37 remarks ( tqi

I srwmi ] qq]crq] faeotq fq<onuri a{IQIIIil:".

(2) Anandagiri onhis comm. on Md9dilkyakdrikd (Z.ZO;

remarks; "xTar) l61o4qt'iqaelq+fr i{T l $ vrc} {gfrFa nqFeEt

f,toarrr?ar S*Fe+TsTer +aq4fid."

i:;) "$<onurttoti qil qti<leqrRqdr(r{asfqFiifr:"""""'n( Kalpataru on Brahmasi i ra 1.1.5 ) . Tbis refers to theY S . 1 . 2 4 .

(*) finqrrrfaqrfffi l6torrritgfla(R"""""( Srikaqtha'sbhalya on Brabmasutra 2.1.3 ) .

(5) On the expression *enstqr{, the comm. Nilakar}tha

remarks : "4etqgrfi tcq$nTiqi +dqrf iq{i4r Erlriltrtrqlq".

(6) The Brhad.yogiy6jflavalkya Smrti ( 2.69 ) lays :

"Fqqri'ta farggw< wrai xgt r Qerrvl {eefie c'lqsrr{gflcq l,'( Qfuanuf is to be corrected to f,fomUi; in some works thesecond line is quoted with the rvord f,fomrr? ).

(7) The Agastya-samhitd readr : SqoqElifgar;ffi€€trfq*

ry{g (4.2). This showr that the Samhit6 contains theviews of the Hiralyagarbba Sastra.

1 7 2 An Introduction to tbe Yogasfr'ra

(A) Commenting on t+rdgaa a)ta' (Harivan:$a 2' 19'i5)

Nilak:,ntha identifies it with fro*nrif qR{lI"

(9) The Bhd.gavata (5.19.15) re'ads; t< lq altu'< ahftgui

QroarrnT qrTsrq qqtE qE I llffd.srt tsfq fant ua) qEi4r EeTtfl'l-

fsf legomt'nt t t t " ( also in Devi-bhagavata 8.1l . l3 ) ' ' the

seconcl balf of the verse shorvs a view of the Hiragya-

sarbha Sastra.

( I 0) Some works describe yoga after declaring that

their yoga views tvere or iginal ly taught by Brahm6 or

Hiragyagarbha. I Tbis sborvs that the views are based

directly or indirectly on tbe Hiraqyagarbha treatise. One

may express doubt about the authenticity of such asscrtion-

a problem which is not to be discussed here. ]

As for example the Vil4udharma'puri+a says that its

views on yoga rvere originally taught by Hiraqyagarbba

( Srudies in the Upapurdqas. Vol I , p. 126 ). A simi lar

statement is found in the cbapters on mokFa6ditra in the

ASvamedha-p. (35'32-5 i ' 40).

(l l) The sentence 'foqqnnaq *aaqfqfa {qrt{rTsqq'( quo:ed in Yatidharmasamgraha, p. 35 ) shows a view

(about the direct means to kaivalya) of tbe Hiraqyagarbha

$astra.

Passages

(l) arsrgarfEqlig fisJ nrc qld {?d: I qr€rqF(gq$frtgqTq-

'f*ia qaq ll (quoted in the bbilya on Sanatsujdtiya l'41

with the remarks'gt q R<oqtr i ' ) .

(z) qqr qTFs€q ,nrdrt fr€tqtqgqts4: I ssi{srttilffiq n}flsr

EdqI SEfq ll (quoted in tbe bhdlya on Sanatsujiriya 2'17

r,vith the remarks wi < Fqtowf ).

t 7 3 .

(3; ar fttar FsEqcriler gusrfaaFwar r arra;qrcnr c{T gar*tqt ,SlfTFd qsqi tt (quoted in the bhdtya on Sanatsujatiya1.42 with the remarks 8<ury{H?z{).

(+) The Vilqupurana reaCs : iqlsqr s{i €r|{ u}rrfr: g€qo: I qiqTqqa) q'lrif qJrrfqla q fs;alil llvRn d{qrq qta i q}rtt

voi enir6eaq I wrf qqT{qiaq wag{q :irlaq rrvl r flQcoarr*f-sqd' Fqls;Aisi """(2. 13.42-4+). Her.e the comm. Sriciharasays : d{rilil<qrfElelwd ft<oarrvTm-a}qslre4$I{. It is to benoted in this connection tbat the follorving two ve'ses

( which are h igbly s imi lar to these vers€s ) are said to be

spoken out by Pi tdmrha ( i . . , , Brahmd who is the s, rme as

Hiragyagarbha ) in the Nd.rada-parivr6jaka Upanifad :

qrwni qil ilfd u)uf: gtt uc t qtrmcil qM qlqfsE qFs;Efd rr dsTr std ? qlft sil q{q(sq;r I srfT an*rr;t<q rldS-{a dnitq l t (5.56-57). Cp. th. fol lowing verses of the Ajva,medha-parvan rvhich are said to be stated by Brahm6 :'naariFao) featq faanaka stq I ar[d] {aEQq etq viwgvaq rrqicqsqfrq ct qdil ts lq r qcr?flsqtE BriiT: sdi qqtq

ru(firq ll (46,52-53) |

APPENDIX II

COMPILATION CF PURANIC PASSAGES

,SIMILAR TO THE SUTRAS IN THE YCGASOTRA

Ch,aPter I

Gil. 2) qlqJ fqt'lql {€tg (Liirsa-p. 1.8.7)

(sil. 12) Fqaqff,frclQa 4qrqn-qruq'iqa: (Skanda-p.

Kumar ika 9.?3 )^ Cp Bbdgavatd. I 1 .9.1 I

' (sE. r 3- I 4) €cr+qwfrrstia qecarqar"" (Yogavdsi ;!ha 6. 67. 44)

(sr. r5) cp. Est aurgafa*' farffi fsqi qa: (Siva-p.

7,2,37.12)

(sil. 15-16) cp. fsqfioElEqr s'lmt d'lar claetle q (TfuQg.quoted in the J ivanmukt iv iveka, Ch. I ) .

(sn. 17) fea,$a falrx fqqnx'lqqtqi r gi: sqrqfln{q rrsrrierrriTqriqq: lr (Mbh. santi-p. 195.15).

.(sfi. 24-28) Liiga-p. 2,9 eontains the following verses

(which are quoted in the Yogavdrttika on

YS. l .2S). The pr inted readings of the Pur lg ic

verse$ are in many places currupt, They may be

corrected with the help of the rcadings as

quoted in the Yogavdrt t ika.

(su.2a) oTfsqqr€+ s*q] ilfio't;rTeqnrqil: I tq m t qaq(Itqr'-'(iq <{t; 6r+g fag tia;e't arq iiur a} u}q Ils 6. I ariSrftTfqiilc ds;a] c $ErqiT il iq s I g{Tor-gErd'€dr{ {qrq} is qifFq: I le, + t fqcrt:tTiqri qtflc

c rraas {qq: I yo is l ailti<nrgae: ilohsqqlqt: ryR { | {lainrr} ta} rrnarq qrtscr: r yv $ |

t75

{s[. 25) q'l+ srfrsrci*a inrisqf fq-o]Eqt rfuiqrFonqttq flsrd xrgf;itFeur: rr

( Liiga-p. 2.g.Es )f$*arFilsrqe+{ arisqd fsslfni roJ*, qrk{rqeic l€qa xrgdatlsor: rr

( S iva-p. 7 .2.6. t7 )(s[. 26) cflds.i sgdrrt il€rqt qrTe|+€ffiq r

sctssr s q{re1 +roisrBEcfrng nvqtlttcrwiEgtrni gsurrrctfi gr: rqisrqfq s{q: fiorsrq'seFqo: ttvstl

( L i r iga-p. 2 .9.46.47 )Also in Siva-p. Z.Z.6. lg_19.

(sE. 2 i) cqe] erss'€il€q f,srqpa q{qrcqr: u(Lir iga-p. 2.9.50; Siva_p. t,Z,6.Zg)surql fq c{: ql€rrq c(}ss(_atss,r I

( S iva-p. 6 .1 r .4z )(sn. 2s) {Fq}: guliTi{tErr€q qrqqrq dqsis1qlc I

( S iva-p. 7 .2,6.24; L , inga_p, 2.9.b1 Wai la we:)

{s[. 30-31) aroei cqq casrq Eqrisffet cwq* rsrrrc: qrqrqril faorlqro-+fterlil: trttl€TryATffiiii urfied:d s fafsq dil: Iqlfqrqcq'irit fuulg q oloar rrRtrE{stfrT$srqra giaTrrce<ut: t

(Linga-p. 1.9,1-3a; thesc are dcf ined inthe verses that foliow ).alro$I E4telqt$'lar: qgn: tqttlciilq: taln{ftcdfsa?qsslar urfie<daq ttlrrg crFn sHaei v faslg a slqei rEsft g=silt imwarm: cfrlfom: rr

176 An Intrcduction to tbe Yogasiltra

Sivo-p. 7.2,38. l '2; these are def ined in

the verses that follow )'

(ru. 3 3) cP. €qst eEfiA{ *!?tg lautg e t

iqi{taq'\ien q: {tf,d $ qgqq: ll

( Bhdgavata-P. 11.20.46 )

ChaPter II

(sn. 3) Purdgic passages simply enumerating the fivc

kle$as ( e.g. Liirga-p.2'9'29 ) are left here'

(sil. 4) sgnlwtqdtrll;Tt ffEq(qrcq u)ftaq t

fqtie.{'lsllFclqs sil{il fsqq{iaatq t I

( Devibhsgavata-P' quoted in the LalitA'

SahasranS'ma-bhdqYa, P' 94 )'

(su. s) qfflA la<qdil q g'€ e gecrfuq t

a{C tafulil q ilqqgsl gF<frxa: tt

(Brahmdg{a-p' 4.3.39'40 ; V6'yu-p' I02 '60b'6I a)

(su. Is) Cp. ag:ufiekd +q greta fqikq: t

( r , inga-p . 1 .S6.30 )

Gu. 29) Purdgic Passag€s simply enumerating tbe eight

angas arc left here'

(sil. 3l) aftel eeantt{ sqsotcRq} |

qsT: d&qel s)t'r:""( Saura-p' l2'3 )

sgsticlqqT q qililttflqRq€q I

( Vilqu-P' 6'7'36 )

aftei stqccirzi il{rsqicftqQJ I

qq *gEqA"' ( Siva'P' 7 '237 'Ls I

\

t2 177

(sfr. 3 2) iTq:cqTcqrqmqr:dsfrss(Tqcq Ifqqqt: tiger: (Saura-p. It.,1)

€rqlq{rlq{Fe'lcoctrs fiaer errq(Vispu-p. 6.7.s7).

ttli gfireterris qs: cfqp'ts s tqle cssrrrE: (qTq ftqq:,...

(Siva-p. 2.,2.g7.|q (Velses of orher purdrlas rhat aresimilar to the si, 3l-32 are left here).

(sI. +6) Rw ge sTffrrrrfil<rl lFe: (Bhagavata-p. 2.2.1s)(sG. 5a) voqfqeqgqqrfr frggrarfol ieiaq r

gqtf farrgnrttfir ciqr€T(q{qq: tl(Vissu_p. 6.2.4s)

(s;. 55) ?{sqil q{qr q'q wqil FcrffiRqilq rtFaarurq.... . . . . .(Vi lgu_p. 6.7.44)

Chapter III

(su. l)€s.goq{t+ nrrqtq?Tnks aerg

:rT {fic rdg rie* rEIIToII Fatc;taq tt

(Kf i rma-p. 2. I I ,g9)FCntq qrTqT clm: TcrFHFs: (Linga_p. t.8.42)gr{W irtq Fsarq eilirir,q: (Siva_p, 7.2,g7.+B)

(su. 2) q*'q'Fsffir Efld ci{qr?dr4fsilq (Linga_p. 1.8.43)dFqseqq'fi,rr{ffdld:.:..dE sTH{ (vi snu _p. 6. 7. 8 g)slarsRqofsil{q gg{r: F?qxur q: tlseqqrrtr(hfihsflQ] eqnFqfr r

(Si va-p. t .2.'zZ,sZA _SSay

[ 7 8 An fntrodrrction to the Yogasiltra

siqrqrEaitqtq g€$tRIIq€q q I

stqqrr{f{ti6: crqfl eqtcgtqt tt

(Agn i -p .374,3)

'{sil. 3) qEciqrrfilqii"""' I gq6q{;rlEqqr{ sqrfqqfc*qi rt

(Siva-P 7 '2.37.621

faqwewiwaea tQq.qlce fltvoq tqf fFsr : (L inga-p. 1.8.44; the reading is h ighly

corrupt).

(sE, 5) scr|e{iTqq?ia qap}+r cqeit (Siva-p. 7.2,37,61)

{s"fi. 36) sqqrri, cqurt sd t Fefaqa+r: rcfdqt ssIrIT Fsla fadtqr qsqTr €q.dT lllvtl

srct gfrcr fq|;rrtgttar fe Esiat taTI(EIEI qst't clnt s'Eil elgmt egat ttt\tt

( L i nga -p . 1 .9 .14 -15 ; t hese a re de f i ned i n t he

verses that follow).

cftqtqsqrstaie{iileercisct, Ieqsqi r{e;e}d urRa+rrg e€a fq It

( S a u r a - P . 1 3 . 5 ) '

qenrsaalwc flvnfc gtn?En I

c=qJqsqt: tafl: csdrt zTqT RUrg I

fifldr{: ,{req} ieJ ucrsf,Tsq dtqq: I(SK. Kumar ik6khalda 55.62; thereaCing iscorrupt ; these

are d.efined in the verses that follow).

cfdrrT sTsqt smt qriarcsrca(dr: t

€e{rli: qfeeit aqt cjrl€q fsqq: ll

( S iva-p . 7 .2 .38 .10)

crfdrT: gilsq\ tsl sflse'f dqTqt I

c=it q'itqci qlqfssatq tr€s'le{I: rl

(Md.rkand. y a-p. 40.1b-8 a)

{sn. 3 i) ag(qti lsaqs+ar sq{qtr* dtfror: | (Linga-p. l'9'52)

179

Clzapur IV( ril. l) wqlq|easlrsqhf€: (Bbdgavata-p. 4.6.9).

qeclqFqoqJri qisfi Rq Fsaq: rq'ltcr.*ff, er: ssi: (Bh6gavata-p. I l. t5.34)

Apart from these, a consicierable number of technical.expressions used in the yS. are found in the purd.pic worksalso. A fel examples are given below :

(t) Filf,fd scrFEr in yS. r.5l; See qlri fqailqqrq.-e...inVis+udharma (Vi.de Studies in the Upapuranas, Vol. I .p. l2l); d?r;zrsrqrlQq qrfio fr{fworq (Vil+u_p. 1.22.50).

(z) rafaoq in ys. l.t 9. See ?<rryq ss,al aqq (Brahmd-+4a-p. 1.30.44). csf iai uqnt q (Mbh. Anu$6sana-p.1 6 . 6 0 ) .

(3) qmatarure: in yS. 1.32. See qtdrqqqTrql$ in yoga-v6s i l [ba G.Gg,2 t .

(a) if,ttqorrgRolr'trwi...rrrEqril: in yS. 1.3J, See t;rfe-i i l?t{ t in yogav6sipgha 4.51.20.),

(5) Ys. 2.I speaks of Fmqrqlq. Several purdr.ras containchapters on lmqtqlTl dealing chiefly rvith worship, vorvsand austerities.

(O) qrao iu YS. 2.31. See q€riril{rqrQiT: in Santi_p.300. 40.

(z) faeei in ys. 2.s4, see k# frxmq vtg (Mun.Sant i -p . ZZ l , t t \ .

(e) XfqS ir Ys. g.G. see fq€r flsefl qqr uFuerr){q(Vayu-p. I1.25); Fqai Fqorsr) lFrn<.l{r (Markaiqey"_;.3 9.39).

180 An Introduction to the Yogasiltra

(9) vriqaceina in YS. 3.17. See sdsta€f,r (Padma-p.

5.10. f 00; Har ivamsa 1.24.23; Matsya-p.2 l ' l ) ; t r iuqafr

ed+ill (Matsya-p. 20.25); grrfueqqta qirsttq (Liiga-

p, l .e .5e) .

(to) ogqoeiTrqft in YS. 3.42. See cfg{o{Frrcffltad: sgs-

elat (Yogavdsiltha 3.57 .32\.

(t l) audqar in YS. 3.46t See qq{iqnn in Mbh-

Adiparvun 68.11; Vana-p. 10.21.

(12) Faa'toaJq in YS. 3.52 See eqFscfr feinqq in Visgu-

p. 6.5.62.

(r:) irre'tawrul{ in YS. 3.51. Sce sfr ie Fqqraaq} qqq

cilf,iqarq (Skanda, KumdrikS.. 55'l l5) in conn ction witb

siddhis.